Search

Two phase II trials (NCT00688753 and NCT00541008) reported efficacy data of sunitinib and everolimus in first-line treatment of metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma (mpRCC). Although most patients receive sunitinib or a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor in first- and second-line treatment, the optimal strategy remained unknown. In 23 centres of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Urogénitales group, after centralised pathological review, we analysed retrospectively progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with mpRCC treated in first-line treatment (PFS-1) with sunitinib or everolimus (primary end-point), PFS in second-line treatment (PFS-2), overall survival (OS), objective response rate, disease control rate (DCR), overall sequence and prognostic factors for OS (secondary end-points). One hundred thirty-eight patients (119 men and 19 women), median age 62.5 years, with mpRCC type 1 (n = 24) or non–type 1 (n = 114), received first-line sunitinib (n = 107) or everolimus (n = 31). With a median follow-up of 92 months, we found no significant difference between the treatment groups in terms of PFS-1 (5.5 versus 6.2 months) and DCR (69% versus 83%). Ninety-eight patients received a second-line treatment, 69% with mTOR inhibitors after sunitinib and 100% with tyrosine kinase inhibitors after everolimus, with similar DCR (64% versus 58%), median PFS-2 (3.4 versus 4.8 months) and OS (16.0 versus 20.3 months). No factor was prognostic for PFS-1, whereas leukocytosis, anaemia and the time from diagnosis to first systemic therapy < 1 year were prognostic for OS. We found no prognostic difference between both pRCC subtypes. The International Metastatic Renal Cell Database Consortium risk factors were prognostic for OS. Sunitinib and everolimus had similar efficacy in first-line treatment of patients with mpRCC. • This is the first study that compared retrospectively sunitinib and everolimus as first-line treatment in mpRCC patients. • Sunitinib and everolimus have similar efficacy in first-line treatment of mpRCCs. • The IMDC risk score is prognostic for overall survival in metastatic pRCCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This study assessed real-world treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) in Germany. Materials & methods: Patients diagnosed with mUC from 2015 to 2019 were identified in two claims databases: AOK PLUS and GWQ. Results: 3226 patients with mUC were analyzed; 1286 (39.9%) received systemic treatment within 12 months of diagnosis (platinum-based chemotherapy: 64.2%). Factors associated with receiving treatment were: younger age, male sex, less comorbidity and recent diagnosis. In AOK PLUS and GWQ populations, unadjusted median overall survival (interquartile range) from diagnosis in treated patients was 13.7 (6.8-32.9) and 13.8 (7.1-41.7) months, and in untreated patients was 3.0 (1.2-10.8) and 3.6 (1.2-18.8) months, respectively. Conclusion: A significant proportion of patients with mUC in Germany receive no systemic treatment.

Purpose: Current German/Austrian antiretroviral treatment guidelines recommend more than 20 combination regimens for first-line therapy, without a preference. Regimens include two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) plus either an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI), a non-NRTI (NNRTI) or a boosted protease inhibitor (PI). The objective was to examine the outcomes of recommended first-line ART in Germany. Methods: This nationwide observational study included treatment-naïve chronically HIV-1 infected patients receiving one of the recommended first-line regimens. Patients were allocated to three arms (INSTI, NNRTI, PI) and were prospectively followed for 24 months. Delayed treatment initiation was defined by a baseline CD4 T-cell count of < 350/µl or CDC clinical stage C. Results: Among a total of 434 patients enrolled, virologic failure was rare and occurred in 4.3% (6/141) in the PI arm, in 3.3% (4/122) in the NNRTI arm and in 0.6% (1/171) in the INSTI arm (p = 0.10). De novo drug resistance mutations developed in only two patients in the NNRTI arm. Nonetheless, treatment modifications were frequent (51%) and mostly performed for strategic reasons. Retention on all initial compounds at month 24 was 64%, 49%, and 22% in the INSTI, NNRTI and PI arms respectively. Delayed treatment initiation was common (47%) and more frequently observed in patients in the PI arm. It was not associated with virological failure. Conclusion: High efficacy and low virological failure rates were observed with recommended first-line regimens independent of delayed treatment initiation, chosen regimen and subsequent treatment modifications, demonstrating the validity of the current treatment guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine whether irinotecan plus oxaliplatin (mIROX) is superior to irinotecan plus infusional 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin (FUFIRI) as first-line therapy of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and methods: A phase III, randomised, open-label multicentre study compared standard treatment with FUFIRI (irinotecan 80mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil 2000mg/m2, folinic acid 500mg/m2 weekly times 6) to mIROX using an identical schedule of irinotecan plus oxaliplatin 85mg/m2 applied on days 1, 15 and 29 of a 7-week cycle. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: A total of 479 eligible patients were randomly assigned. Progression-free survival was 7.2months in the mIROX arm and 8.2months in the FUFIRI arm [hazard ratio=1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94–1.37; P =0.178]. Comparable results were also obtained for overall survival time with 19months in the mIROX-arm and 22months in the FUFIRI-arm (hazard ratio=1.08, P =0.276). Both regimens induced an identical objective response rate (ORR) of 41%, but disease control rate (ORR plus stable disease) was significantly greater in the FUFIRI group (81% versus 68%, P =0.001). Most frequent grades 1–4 side-effects of mIROX and FUFIRI treatment were nausea (80% versus 73%) and delayed diarrhoea (79% versus 68%). Grades 3–4 toxicities were generally below 10%, except for diarrhoea which was more frequent in the mIROX-arm compared to the FUFIRI-arm (19% versus 30%, P =0.006) Conclusion: mIROX failed to show superior activity compared to high-dose 5-FU/folinic acid plus irinotecan. Due to better tolerability the combination of high-dose 5-FU/folinic acid and irinotecan remains a standard of care in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]