Search

Background : Axitinib monotherapy obtained approval in pre-treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients and recently in combination with pembrolizumab or avelumab in the first-line setting. However, patient profiles that may obtain increased benefit from this drug and its combinations still need to be identified. Patients and Methods : Retrospective multicentre analysis describing clinical characteristics associated with axitinib long-responder (LR) population by comparing two extreme-response sub-groups (progression-free survival [PFS] ≥9 months versus disease progression/refractory patients [RP]). A multivariate logistic-regression model was used to analyse clinical factors. Efficacy and safety were also analysed. Results : In total, 157 patients who received axitinib in second or subsequent line were evaluated (91 LR and 66 RP). Older age at start of axitinib and haemoglobin levels > LLN were independent predictive factors for LR in multivariate analyses. In LR patients, median (m) PFS was 18.1 months, median overall survival (OS) was 36.0 months and objective response rate (ORR) was 45.5%. In 59 LR patients receiving axitinib in second-line, mPFS was 18.7 months, mOS was 44.8 months and ORR was 43.9%. mOS was significantly longer in second line compared to subsequent lines (44.8 versus 26.5 months; P=0.009). In LR versus RP, mPFS with sunitinib in first-line was correlated with mPFS with axitinib in second-line (27.2 versus 10.9 months P Conclusions : This study confirms the long-term benefits of axitinib in a selected population, helping clinicians to select the best sequential approach and patients who could obtain a greater benefit from axitinib. Microabstract Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who may benefit most from axitinib still need to be identified. AXILONG study confirms long-term benefits in a selected population in which age at axitinib initiation and haemoglobin baseline levels were significantly associated although further validation may be required. First-line sunitinib outcomes were also correlated with prolonged response. These results might be helpful in real-life management of mRCC patients.

Background Cabozantinib, a potent multi-tyrosine kinases inhibitor (TKI), has demonstrated overall survival (OS) benefit over everolimus in patients previously treated with VEGFR TKI for metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC). The efficacy of systemic treatments after cabozantinib failure has not been investigated. Methods We conducted a retrospective study on patients receiving systemic treatment after cabozantinib failure in heavily pre-treated patient with mRCC. We assessed Time to Treatment Failure (TTF), OS and objective response rate (ORR). Results Among 150 patients treated with cabozantinib in our institution, 56 (37.3%) received subsequent systemic therapy and were eligible for the analysis. IMDC prognostic group was good, intermediate and poor in 11 (19.6%), 24 (42.9%) and 11 (19.6%) patients, respectively. Cabozantinib was administered mainly as a second (41.1%), or third (33.9%) line treatment. axitinib or immune-checkpoint inhibitors were the subsequent treatment in 18 (34.8%) patients for each everolimus (n:16, 28.6%), other angiogenesis inhibitors (n:4, 7.1%) TTF and OS from subsequent systemic therapy after cabozantinib failure were 2.8 months (95%CI 1.9-3.7) and 7.7 months (95%CI 4.4-10.8), respectively. ORR was 8.7% and two patients with axitinib and two patients treated with Immune checkpoint inhibitors achieved a partial response. Conclusions Overall, activity of systemic therapies after cabozantinib was limited. Micro abstract We performed a retrospective analysis on 56 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received at least 1 systemic treatment line after cabozantinib. Median OS after cabozantinib was 7.7 months, while median TTF after cabozantinib was 2.8 months. Further investigation is needed in this clinical context

There are known correlations between axitinib exposure and treatment response. The aim of the article was to study relationships between the axitinib steady-state trough concentration and the treatment efficacy and toxicity.35 patients (24 men and 11 women), treated or initiating treatment with axitinib, were included in the study over the period 2016-2019. Blood samples were collected following 2 weeks of treatment (in patients who initiated the therapy) and at the end of Cycles 1, 2, and 3 thereafter (in the entire study population). For concentration measurements, high-performance liquid chromatography - mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS) was applied. Treatment efficacy was assessed according to the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Therapy toxicity was evaluated according to the CTCAE criteria.A statistically significant relationship between the first measured axitinib trough concentration (CThere are significant relationships between axitinib C

Introduction Combined axitinib and immuno-oncology (IO) therapy is approved for first-line advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Overlapping toxicities represent a clinical challenge. Calculating the time to resolution (TTR) of common axitinib-related adverse events (AEs) following treatment interruption may help to identify AE etiology and determine appropriate management strategies. Materials and Methods Data from 5 randomized or single arm axitinib monotherapy or combination studies were analyzed. Patients with histologically confirmed clear cell aRCC were pooled into 3 cohorts based on treatment received: axitinib monotherapy, axitinib + IO, and other tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Any grade and grade ≥3 treatment-emergent diarrhea, fatigue, hypertension, nausea, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPE) were assessed. TTR was defined as the time from treatment interruption/discontinuation to resolution. Results The axitinib monotherapy cohort comprised 532 patients, the axitinib + IO cohort 541 patients, and the other TKI cohort 882 patients. Median TTR for all AEs (any grade) in the axitinib monotherapy cohort ranged from 1–3 days, except for fatigue (8 days). For diarrhea, hypertension, nausea, and PPE, median TTRs were longer in the axitinib + IO (4–11 days) and other TKI (7–8 days) cohorts versus the monotherapy cohort. Results were similar when only AEs of grade ≥3 were considered. Conclusions The TTR of monotherapeutic axitinib-related AEs is ≤3 days, except for fatigue, and generally numerically shorter than for other single agent TKIs and axitinib + IO. This has important implications for identifying AE etiology with combined axitinib-IO therapy and implementation of appropriate management strategies. ClinicalTrials.org identifiers: NCT00678392, NCT00920816, NCT02493751, NCT02684006, NCT02853331. MicroAbstract Overlapping toxicities are a concern with combined tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) and immuno-oncology (IO) therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. We analyzed the resolution time of common axitinib-related adverse events (AEs) following treatment interruption due to the AE. Resolution time of AEs for axitinib monotherapy was typically ≤3 days and was numerically shorter versus other single agent TKIs. This can support identification of the etiology of AEs with combined TKI-IO therapy and may enable faster implementation of an appropriate management plan.

The objective of the study was to validate the characteristics of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model in patients treated with first-line axitinib in clinical practice.We retrospectively evaluated 143 patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma who were treated with axitinib as the first-line therapy between October 2008 and February 2019. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated according to the IMDC prognostic model. We investigated the intragroup heterogeneity in the intermediate-risk group and divided these patients according to abnormal C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. An inverse probability of treatment-weighted (IPTW)-adjusted Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effects of the CRP-risk model of OS in the patients in the IMDC intermediate-risk group.A significant difference in OS was observed in patients in the IMDC intermediate- and poor-risk group, although no significant difference was observed between the IMDC favorable- and intermediate-risk group. Significantly shorter prognosis was observed in patients in the IMDC intermediate-risk group who had 2 risk factors and CRP ≥0.3 mg/dL (inter-high group) than in those with 1 risk factor or 2 risk factors with CRP 0.3 mg/dL (inter-low group). IPTW-adjusted Cox regression analysis revealed significant differences in the OS between the inter-low and inter-high groups.The IMDC prognostic model was active in patients who received first-line axitinib treatment. The combination of CRP value with the number of positive risk factors in the IMDC model might predict prognosis in patients with IMDC intermediate-risk treated with first-line axitinib.

Axitinib 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.AXIS 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.Of 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.In 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.

Combination treatments with immuno-oncology (IO) agents and IO agents plus a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFR-TKI) have been approved for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). No direct comparisons have been performed among these treatment options. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare and rank the available regimens for first-line treatment in terms of survival benefit and efficacy. In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review statement, a systematic search of reported studies was performed in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE up to May 31, 2019. Network meta-analysis models were adjusted using the Bayesian method. Four randomized clinical trials, with a total of 3758 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Considering systemic therapy, 1880 patients had received sunitinib and 550, 432, 442, and 454 patients had received ipilimumab plus nivolumab (ipi + nivo), pembrolizumab plus axitinib (pembro + axi), avelumab plus axitinib (avelu + axi), and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo + bev). No difference was found in overall survival between ipi + nivo and pembro + axi for the intention to treat population (hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.92-1.97). No difference was found in progression-free survival among the treatments. The overall response rate (ORR) was superior with pembro + axi and avelu + axi compared with the ORR with the other treatments (atezo + bev vs. pembro + axi: HR, 0.66; 95% CrI, 0.52-0.84; ipi + nivo vs. pembro + axi: HR, 0.73; 95% CrI, 0.59-0.90; atezo + bev vs. avelu + axi: HR, 0.55; 95% CrI, 0.43-0.71; avelu + axi vs. ipi + nivo: HR, 1.66; 95% CrI, 1.31-2.12), with no differences across them (HR, 1.21; 95% CrI, 0.95-1.53). In the present indirect comparison, for an intention to treat population, we found no survival differences between pembro + axi and ipi + nivo. All treatments showed better progression-free survival compared with sunitinib that was similar among them. The combination of an IO agent (pembrolizumab or avelumab) and axitinib seemed to be the most effective therapy for the ORR.

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors are the most commonly used medications in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Recently, large clinical trials have shown favorable outcomes in patients treated with combined immune checkpoint plus VEGFR inhibition compared with VEGFR inhibition alone. However, the benefit among favorable risk (based on International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium score) and elderly (age > 65 years) patients was not clear, leading to a discrepancy between United States Food and Drug Administration and European Association of Urology recommendations. Materials and Methods We searched available literature for phase III randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of combining immunotherapy plus VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors versus standard of care in patients with previously untreated mRCC. Combinations that were included in United States Food and Drug Administration recommendations or European Association of Urology guidelines were used for analysis. We performed a meta-analysis with a random effects model to evaluate the efficacy of immunotherapy-VEGFR inhibitor combinations compared with sunitinib in favorable risk and elderly patients. Results Our analysis demonstrated that progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly prolonged with combination therapy compared with sunitinib in patients with age > 65 years (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.84; P = .001). The PFS in favorable risk disease was improved with combination therapy compared with sunitinib, but the difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-1.01; P = .055). Conclusion Our meta-analysis strengthens the trend of beneficial effect in prolonging PFS in both subgroups compared with each trial alone, indicating that favorable risk and elderly patients with mRCC likely benefit from combining programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death-ligand 1 and VEGFR inhibition.

Background: Mucositis is often experienced in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with targeted therapies. This might impair daily quality of life and lead to dose reduction, discontinuation, or treatment shift. We assessed the effect of folic acid to reduce mucositis. Patients and Methods: Patients treated with systemic therapy for mRCC who developed Grade ≥2 mucositis according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE) received oral folic acid to reduce mucositis. The medical charts were retrospectively reviewed. Results: A total of 77 patients had Grade ≥2 mucositis during therapy with sunitinib (n = 29), pazopanib (n = 24), everolimus (n = 10), axitinib (n = 4), temsirolimus (n = 3), interleukin-2/interferon-α (n = 3), cabozantinib (n = 2), bevacizumab (n = 1), and nivolumab (n = 1). Given in doses of 1 to 5 mg daily, folic acid significantly reduced mucositis, mean CTCAE grade 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-1.03) versus 2.38 (95% CI, 2.26-2.54; P

Background The optimal treatment option for non–clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is not established. We conducted a multicenter phase II trial of axitinib for patients with advanced nccRCC who had failed prior treatment with temsirolimus. Patients and Methods Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic or recurrent nccRCC received 5 mg axitinib twice daily. Prior use of vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors was not allowed. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, overall survival, and safety. Results Forty patients were included between January 2013 and December 2016. The median age was 59 years (range, 22-84 years). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were 0 (7.5%) and 1 (92.5%), and 82.5% of patients had undergone prior nephrectomy. Papillary type 2 (60.0%) was the most common histology, and patients belonged to favorable (12.5%), intermediate (72.5%), and poor (15.0%) risk groups according to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk stratification. With a median follow-up duration of 14.7 months (95% confidence interval, [CI], 10.8-18.6 months), the median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.2-9.5 months). The ORR was 37.5%, and the disease control rate was 67.5%. The median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI, 6.4-17.7 months). Most adverse events were manageable, and no unexpected toxicities were found. Conclusion Axitinib showed promising efficacy in terms of ORR and PFS in recurrent or metastatic nccRCC when used after failure with temsirolimus.

Introduction Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are potent inhibitors of gastric acid secretion and can affect the optimal absorption of concomitant oral medications, such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of PPI use on survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated in the targeted therapy era. Materials and Methods We conducted a pooled analysis of mRCC patients treated in phase II and III clinical trials. Statistical analyses were performed using Cox regression adjusted for several risk factors and the Kaplan–Meier method. Results We identified 2188 patients treated with sunitinib (n = 952), axitinib (n = 626) or sorafenib (n = 610), of whom 120 were PPI users. Overall, PPI users showed similar overall survival compared with non-PPI users (hazard ratio [HR], 1.051; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.769-1.438; P = .754; median, 24.1 vs. 21.3 months). Similarly, progression-free survival (HR, 1.016; 95% CI, 0.793-1.301; P = .902; median, 5.5 vs. 8.0 months) and objective response rates (23.3% vs. 27.4%; P = .344) were not different between PPI users and nonusers. These findings were consistent across International mRCC Database Consortium risk groups and according to line of therapy. Adverse events were similar between PPI users and nonusers. Conclusion We showed that PPI use does not appear to negatively affect the efficacy and safety of select VEGF-TKIs in patients with mRCC. Documentation of concomitant medications and patient education on potential drug interactions are critical for optimizing the use of oral cancer-targeting therapy.

In order to describe the impact of sarcomatoid dedifferentiation on outcome in metastatic clear cell RCC treated with first-line anti-VEGFR-TKIs, we retrospectively reviewed 124 patients files. An important sarco- matoid component, defined as ‡25% involvement of the primary tumor, was associated with poor outcome. Analysis of the extent of sarcomatoid features in resected metastases can also provide additional prognostic information. Introduction: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of antievascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (anti-VEGFR-TKIs) in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC) with sar- comatoid dedifferentiation. Patients and Methods: The files of all patients with m-ccRCC consecutively treated with first-line anti-VEGFR-TKIs at the authors' institution were retrospectively reviewed. Pathology slides from nephrec- tomy and metastasectomy were assessed for the presence and extent of sarcomatoid dedifferentiation. Results: A total of 124 patients were included; nephrectomy and metastasectomy specimens were available in 117 and 35 patients, respectively. Thirty percent of the primary nephrectomy specimens had sarcomatoid features, and the median involvement of the sarcomatoid component was 21% (range, 1%-95%). Patients with an important sarco- matoid component, defined as � 25% involvement of the tumor, had a very poor outcome: progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3 and 6 months, respectively, and no partial responses (PR) were observed. Patients without sarcomatoid dedifferentiation or with sarcomatoid involvement < 25% had a PFS of 12 months (P < .0001; hazard ratio (HR), 51; 95% CI, 12.58-207.3), an OS of 22 months (P < .0001, HR, 10.72; 95% CI, 3.56- 32.25), and a PR rate of 50% (P ¼ .0015). Patients with a sarcomatoid component � 25% in the metastasectomy also had a poorer PFS and OS on anti-VEGFR-TKIs compared with patients with < 25% of sarcomatoid features at these sites. Conclusion: Patients with m-ccRCC whose tumors contain a component of sarcomatoid dedifferentiation of � 25% of the total tumor volume have a very poor outcome when treated with anti-VEGFR-TKIs. Analysis of the extent of sarcomatoid features in resected metastases can provide additional prognostic information.

Background Everolimus (E) and axitinib (A) have been standard treatments for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma after failure of first-line therapy (1L) with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy. This study aims to compare both drugs in a large comprehensive cancer center. Methods Patient characteristics and outcome data from all patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received E or A as second-line therapy at Gustave Roussy from April 2007 to May 2015 have been recorded. Results A total of 81 patients were treated with E and 45 patients with A. There were no major differences between the 2 groups. The most common 1L was sunitinib (79% in the E group and 82.2% in the A group). The median follow-up was 29 months; 26 months for A and 33 months for E (P = .046). The median overall survival (OS) was 21.5 months for E and 14.9 months for A (P = .23). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.3 and 7.7 months for E and A, respectively (P = .39). Partial response was achieved in 4% and in 24% of patients (P = .002) in the E and A cohort, respectively. In the A group, the median PFS and OS were statistically different according to response, tumor burden, and 1L duration. No differences were found in the E arm. Conclusion In this series, there are no significant differences for PFS and OS with E and A. A appears to provide more objective response. A appears to be more effective in patients with small tumor burden, responders to 1L, and 1L therapy > 12 months.

Background Given the variability in drug levels with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), dose escalation at the occurrence of progressive disease (PD) might have antitumor effects. Patients and Methods The data from patients with mRCC who were treated at the Cleveland Clinic with TKIs and received a dose escalation after PD in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, were retrospectively reviewed. Patient- and disease-related data were collected and summarized as frequency counts and percentages or medians and ranges. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to summarize the treatment duration for the escalated doses. Results Twenty-two patients were identified. Most patients (82%) were men; the median age at diagnosis was 58 years (range, 40-71 years). The most common histologic type was clear cell (73%). Axitinib was the most frequently escalated agent after PD (17 patients), followed by sunitinib (3 patients), and pazopanib (2 patients). Before PD, the median treatment duration was 6.8 months (range, 1.6-50.6 months). Of the 18 patients with evaluable tumor measurements after dose escalation, 14 (78%) had a decrease in tumor burden. The median decrease in tumor burden after dose escalation was 14% (range, 2%-58%); 4 patients (22%) had decreases ≥10%, 2 (11%) ≥20%, and 4 (22%) >30% (RECIST partial response). At the last follow-up examination, 5 patients (23%) continued to be treated at escalated doses. The median duration of escalated therapy was estimated at 10.1 months (range, 0.6 to 37.9 months). Conclusion Dose escalation of TKIs after PD for select patients with mRCC can lead to a reduction in tumor burden and extend the duration of therapy.

Background In a randomized phase III trial in treatment-naive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), axitinib versus sorafenib yielded numerically longer progression-free survival (median, 10.1 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 1-sided P = .038) and significantly higher objective response rate (32% vs. 15%; 1-sided P = .0006). In this article, we report overall survival (OS) and updated safety results. Patients and Methods Previously untreated patients with metastatic RCC (n = 288), stratified according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS; 0 vs. 1), were randomized 2:1 to receive axitinib 5 mg twice per day (b.i.d.; n = 192) or sorafenib 400 mg b.i.d. (n = 96). Results Median OS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 21.7 months (18.0-31.7) with axitinib versus 23.3 months (18.1-33.2) with sorafenib (stratified HR, 0.995; 95% CI, 0.731-1.356; 1-sided P = .4883). Among patients with ECOG PS of 0, median OS was numerically longer with axitinib than with sorafenib (41.2 vs. 31.9 months; HR, 0.811, 1-sided P = .1748), whereas among patients with ECOG PS 1, median OS was shorter with axitinib than with sorafenib (14.2 vs. 19.8 months; HR, 1.203; 1-sided; P = .7973). Incidence and severity of common adverse events were consistent with previous reports. Conclusion OS was similar between axitinib and sorafenib in treatment-naive patients with metastatic RCC, and no new safety signals emerged.

Background In a randomized phase II trial in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), objective response rate was significantly higher with axitinib versus placebo titration (54% vs. 34%; 1-sided P = .019). Patients and Methods Treatment-naive patients with mRCC (n = 213) received axitinib 5 mg twice per day (b.i.d.) for 4 weeks. Patients meeting dose titration criteria were randomized to receive axitinib 5 mg b.i.d. with axitinib or placebo titration (n = 56 each); 91 patients ineligible for randomization continued axitinib 5 mg b.i.d.; 10 discontinued before randomization. Results Median overall survival (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 42.7 months (24.7-not estimable) with axitinib titration versus 30.4 months (23.7-45.0) with placebo titration (stratified hazard ratio, 0.785; 95% CI, 0.485-1.272; 1-sided P = .162), and 41.6 months (95% CI, 33.0-not estimable) in nonrandomized patients. Safety data were consistent with previous reports. Conclusion Median overall survival was numerically longer in patients with first-line mRCC who received axitinib versus placebo titration. No new safety signal was observed after long-term axitinib treatment in first-line mRCC.

The objective of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the clinical outcomes of 110 consecutive Japanese patients who received at least two cycles of sunitinib as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in a routine clinical setting. Initially, 50 mg of sunitinib was administered once daily on a 4 weeks on, followed by 2 weeks off dosing schedule; however, dose modification was required in 102 patients, and the relative dose intensity was 62.6 % throughout this series. As the best responses to sunitinib, 2, 28, 65 and 15 were judged to show a complete response, partial response, stable disease and progressive disease, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) following the treatment with sunitinib were 7.8 and 33.2 months, respectively. Multivariate analyses of several factors identified the following independent predictors of PFS and OS: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) classification and C-reactive protein (CRP) level for PFS and liver metastasis, MSKCC classification and CRP level for OS. The common adverse events related to sunitinib corresponding to ≥grade 3 were thrombocytopenia in 59, leukopenia in 23, fatigue in 22, hand-foot syndrome in 15 and hypertension in 12. Quality of life (QOL) analysis using 36-Item Short Form revealed no significant differences in any scale scores between surveys performed before and 3 months after the treatment with sunitinib. Collectively, these findings suggest that the introduction of sunitinib as a first-line agent can lead to favorable disease control with acceptable tolerability, resulting in improvement in the prognosis and QOL of Japanese patients with mRCC.

Several adverse events (AEs) are known to be commonly observed during treatment with different tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. However, no significant correlation appears present in the profiles of such AEs between first- and second-line TKI therapies. Therefore, a second-line targeted agent for patients with mRCC could be selected irrespective of the AE profile during first-line TKI therapy.Several adverse events (AEs) commonly observed during treatment with different tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the appearance of such AEs during treatment with first-line TKIs significantly affects the occurrence of AEs during second-line TKI therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).The present study included 154 consecutive patients with mRCC treated with second-line TKIs after the discontinuation of first-line TKIs. The association of AEs, including diarrhea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, hypertension, and hypothyroidism, between first- and second-line therapies was analyzed in these 154 patients.For all 5 AEs assessed in the present study, the proportion of patients experiencing AEs or those grade ≥ 3 during second-line TKI therapy was not significantly different among the following 3 groups: patients without AEs, those with grade ≤ 2 AEs, and those with grade ≥ 3 AEs during first-line TKI therapy. Furthermore, no significant difference was seen in progression-free or overall survival after the introduction of second-line TKIs between patients with and without grade ≥ 3 AEs during treatment with first-line TKIs.The incidence of AEs or grade ≥ 3 AEs during second-line TKI therapy are not dependent on the profiles of AEs during first-line TKI therapy in patients with mRCC. Therefore, AEs that occur during first-line TKI therapy should not affect the selection of second-line targeted agents for patients with mRCC.

Background Axitinib is an approved treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after failure of 1 systemic therapy. Patients and Methods Long-term safety with single-agent axitinib was analyzed using pooled data from clinical trials in 672 previously treated patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) and in 1304 patients with different advanced solid tumors. In all studies, except the phase I first-in-human, dose-finding study, the starting dose of oral axitinib was 5 mg twice daily continuously. Common long-term treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were identified in patients who received axitinib for ≥ 2 years, then evaluated in all patients, and assessed using interval, cumulative, and latency analyses. Results In all, 108 (16%) previously treated patients with mRCC received axitinib for ≥ 2 years. In interval analysis, most AEs occurred during the first 6 months of treatment, with rates stable or decreased over time; rates increased for proteinuria, peripheral edema, and increased blood creatinine. Common Grade ≥ 3 AE rates declined or plateaued over time, except for increased amylase and myocardial infarction. Results were similar in cumulative analysis in this population, and in interval and cumulative analyses in all patients with mRCC and those with advanced solid tumors. Conclusion Declining or stable rates of most AEs support an acceptable long-term safety profile for axitinib in patients with mRCC. However, increases in the rates of some AEs warrant monitoring. This analysis is limited in that it was retrospective and included a relatively small patient population.

Several molecular pathways are implicated in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) pathogenesis, including the von Hippel-Lindau gene inactivation leading to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) expression. SU11248 and AG013736 are small-molecule inhibitors of the tyrosine kinase portion of the VEGF and PDGF receptors. Substantial clinical activity has been reported for these agents in metastatic RCC trials, leading to additional investigations in a variety of settings.

Background In a phase II study of axitinib for cytokine-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma, median overall survival (OS) was 29.9 months (95% CI, 20.3 to not estimable months). Patients and Methods Long-term survival data were collected retrospectively from 52 patients with cytokine-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received axitinib in a completed phase II study (protocol 1), 11 of whom enrolled in a continuing access protocol (protocol 2), for the current observational study (protocol 3). In a post hoc analysis, the patients were grouped into quartiles based on cycle 1 day 1, 1- to 2-hour post-dose axitinib plasma levels to explore the impact of drug exposure on efficacy. Results The 5-year survival rate was 20.6% (95% CI, 10.9%-32.4%), with a median follow-up of 5.9 years. Frequent all-grade adverse events were fatigue (n = 38; 73.1%), diarrhea (n = 34; 65.4%), hypertension (n = 33; 63.5%), and nausea (n = 33; 63.5%). Quartile 3 patients (axitinib level, 45.2-56.4 ng/mL; n = 12) had the best clinical outcome: objective response rate 82%, median progression-free survival (PFS) 28.3 months, and median OS that was not reached after 5 years. Conclusions Axitinib was well tolerated and provided an estimated 5-year survival rate of 20.6% for cytokine-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Exploratory analyses showed numerically higher objective response rate and longer OS and PFS in patients who achieved post–first-dose axitinib plasma concentrations within a specific range.

Hypertension (40% versus 29%), fatigue (39% versus 32%), dysphonia (31% versus 14%), and hypothyroidism (19% versus 8%) were more common in patients assigned to axitinib, while palmarplantar erythrodysesthesia (27% versus 51%), rash (13% versus 32%), alopecia (4% versus 32%), and anemia (4% versus 12%) occurred more frequently with sorafenib. This efficacy and toxicity profile appeared to result in a benefit for axitinib compared with sorafenib in composite quality of life scores. 6 Axitinib is clearly an active and tolerable agent. One of the major issues raised by the AXIS data are whether it has been tested in the optimal setting in the AXIS trial.

Increased understanding of the molecular pathophysiology of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has led to development of antiangiogenic therapies in the past 5 years that significantly improved the prognosis. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a major growth factor in tumor angiogenesis and is implicated in tumor progression of several types of cancer, including mRCC. Use of 2 distinct approaches resulted in clinical efficacy in blocking the VEGF pathway: small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (sunitinib, sorafenib, axitinib, pazopanib) and the humanized anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody bevacizumab that binds circulating VEGF and prevents activation of the VEGF receptor. In the 2 large phase III trials AVOREN and CALGB 90206, bevacizumab combined with interferon alfa demonstrated its efficacy as a first-line therapy in terms of progression-free survival. Nevertheless, in the era of targeted therapies, other studies are still needed to better obtain the maximal clinical benefit of bevacizumab. The aim of this overview is to report the current role of bevacizumab in the treatment of metastatic kidney cancer and to highlight possible combinations or sequential strategies that involve other targeted agents.

Clear-cell renal cell carcinoma is characterized by the inactivation of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene, which results in an overproduction of vascular endothelial growth factor that promotes tumor angiogenesis, growth, and metastasis after binding with its receptor. The mammalian target of rapamycin signal transduction pathway is involved in the translation of hypoxia inducible factor-1 and vascular endothelial growth factor. Sunitinib, sorafenib, bevacizumab, and temsirolimus have improved clinical outcomes by inhibiting these tumorigenic pathways. Other multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (lapatinib, axitinib, pazopanib) and antiangiogenic agents (lenalidomide) have also demonstrated activity in early studies. Combinations of these agents are being evaluated. Clinical trials designed to further assess these and other agents need to be vigorously supported.

Background In the phase III axitinib second-line (AXIS) trial, axitinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus sorafenib in patients with previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Analyses of associations between germline single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and outcomes are reported. Patients and Methods DNA samples from blood were genotyped using TaqMan allelic discrimination. Logistic/Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate association of 15 SNPs in vascular endothelial growth factor ( VEGF ) -A , VEGF receptor ( VEGFR ) 1 , VEGFR2 , or hypoxia-inducible factor ( HIF) -1α with outcomes for blood pressure (BP; Grade ≥ 3 hypertension, diastolic BP > 90 mm Hg, and increase ≥ 15 mm Hg from baseline) and efficacy (independent review committee-assessed objective response rate and PFS, and overall survival [OS]). Multivariate analyses assessed SNPs and baseline characteristics as potential predictors of PFS and OS. Results Genotype data were available for 305 (42.7%) of 714 patients; 159 received axitinib and 146 sorafenib. After Bonferroni adjustment, no SNP was associated with BP outcomes. In axitinib-treated patients, VEGF-A rs699947 (A/A vs. C/C) and rs833061 (C/C vs. T/T) were associated with longer OS (27.0 vs. 13.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.39; P adjusted = .015). In sorafenib-treated patients, VEGFR2 rs2071559 (G/G vs. A/A) was associated with longer OS (26.8 vs. 13.8 months; HR, 0.41; P adjusted = .030). In multivariate analyses, no SNP predicted axitinib efficacy; VEGFR2 rs2071559 predicted PFS ( P = .0053) and OS ( P = .0027) for sorafenib. Sensitivity/specificity of VEGFR2 rs2071559 for OS was Conclusion No SNP predicted axitinib outcomes. Although VEGFR2 rs2071559 predicted sorafenib efficacy in patients with mRCC, sensitivity/specificity limitations preclude its use for selecting individual patients for sorafenib treatment.