Daniel Y.C. Heng

Cabozantinib versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUNDnCabozantinib is an oral, small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) as well as MET and AXL, each of which has been implicated in the pathobiology of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma or in the development of resistance to antiangiogenic drugs. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib, as compared with everolimus, in patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy.nnnMETHODSnWe randomly assigned 658 patients to receive cabozantinib at a dose of 60 mg daily or everolimus at a dose of 10 mg daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary efficacy end points were overall survival and objective response rate.nnnRESULTSnMedian progression-free survival was 7.4 months with cabozantinib and 3.8 months with everolimus. The rate of progression or death was 42% lower with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.75; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 21% with cabozantinib and 5% with everolimus (P<0.001). A planned interim analysis showed that overall survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89; P=0.005) but did not cross the significance boundary for the interim analysis. Adverse events were managed with dose reductions; doses were reduced in 60% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 25% of those who received everolimus. Discontinuation of study treatment owing to adverse events occurred in 9% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 10% of those who received everolimus.nnnCONCLUSIONSnProgression-free survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus among patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. (Funded by Exelixis; METEOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01865747.).

External validation and comparison with other models of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium prognostic model: a population-based study

BACKGROUNDnThe International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model offers prognostic information for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. We tested the accuracy of the model in an external population and compared it with other prognostic models.nnnMETHODSnWe included patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma who were treated with first-line VEGF-targeted treatment at 13 international cancer centres and who were registered in the Consortiums database but had not contributed to the initial development of the Consortium Database model. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We compared the Database Consortium model with the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (CCF) model, the International Kidney Cancer Working Group (IKCWG) model, the French model, and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) model by concordance indices and other measures of model fit.nnnFINDINGSnOverall, 1028 patients were included in this study, of whom 849 had complete data to assess the Database Consortium model. Median overall survival was 18·8 months (95% 17·6-21·4). The predefined Database Consortium risk factors (anaemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, hypercalcaemia, Karnofsky performance status <80%, and <1 year from diagnosis to treatment) were independent predictors of poor overall survival in the external validation set (hazard ratios ranged between 1·27 and 2·08, concordance index 0·71, 95% CI 0·68-0·73). When patients were segregated into three risk categories, median overall survival was 43·2 months (95% CI 31·4-50·1) in the favourable risk group (no risk factors; 157 patients), 22·5 months (18·7-25·1) in the intermediate risk group (one to two risk factors; 440 patients), and 7·8 months (6·5-9·7) in the poor risk group (three or more risk factors; 252 patients; p<0·0001; concordance index 0·664, 95% CI 0·639-0·689). 672 patients had complete data to test all five models. The concordance index of the CCF model was 0·662 (95% CI 0·636-0·687), of the French model 0·640 (0·614-0·665), of the IKCWG model 0·668 (0·645-0·692), and of the MSKCC model 0·657 (0·632-0·682). The reported versus predicted number of deaths at 2 years was most similar in the Database Consortium model compared with the other models.nnnINTERPRETATIONnThe Database Consortium model is now externally validated and can be applied to stratify patients by risk in clinical trials and to counsel patients about prognosis.nnnFUNDINGnNone.

The impact of cytoreductive nephrectomy on survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy.

PURPOSEnVascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy is a standard of care in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy in the era of novel agents remains poorly defined.nnnMATERIALS AND METHODSnWe retrospectively reviewed baseline characteristics and outcomes of 314 patients with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy naïve, metastatic renal cell carcinoma from United States and Canadian cancer centers to study the impact of cytoreductive nephrectomy on overall survival.nnnRESULTSnPatients who underwent cytoreductive nephrectomy (201) were younger (p < 0.01), and more likely to have a better Karnofsky performance status (p < 0.01), more than 1 site of metastasis (p = 0.04) and lower corrected calcium levels (p < 0.01) compared to those who did not undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy (113). On univariable analysis cytoreductive nephrectomy was associated with a median overall survival of 19.8 months compared to 9.4 months for patients who did not undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy (HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.32, 0.59; p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis and adjusting for established prognostic risk factors the overall survival difference persisted (adjusted HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46, 0.99; p = 0.04) in favor of the cytoreductive nephrectomy group. In subgroup analyses stratified for favorable/intermediate/poor risk criteria, patients in the poor risk group had a marginal benefit (p = 0.06). Similarly patients with Karnofsky performance status less than 80% also had a marginal survival benefit (p = 0.08).nnnCONCLUSIONSnIn this retrospective study cytoreductive nephrectomy was independently associated with a prolonged overall survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor targeted agents, although the benefit is marginal in those patients with poor risk features.

Cabozantinib versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma (METEOR): final results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUNDnCabozantinib is an oral inhibitor of tyrosine kinases including MET, VEGFR, and AXL. The randomised phase 3 METEOR trial compared the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib versus the mTOR inhibitor everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who progressed after previous VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor treatment. Here, we report the final overall survival results from this study based on an unplanned second interim analysis.nnnMETHODSnIn this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years and older with advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, measurable disease, and previous treatment with one or more VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors to receive 60 mg cabozantinib once a day or 10 mg everolimus once a day. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice and web response system. Stratification factors were Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and the number of previous treatments with VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent radiology review committee in the first 375 randomly assigned patients and has been previously reported. Secondary endpoints were overall survival and objective response in all randomly assigned patients assessed by intention-to-treat. Safety was assessed per protocol in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The study is closed for enrolment but treatment and follow-up of patients is ongoing for long-term safety evaluation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865747.nnnFINDINGSnBetween Aug 8, 2013, and Nov 24, 2014, 658 patients were randomly assigned to receive cabozantinib (n=330) or everolimus (n=328). The median duration of follow-up for overall survival and safety was 18·7 months (IQR 16·1-21·1) in the cabozantinib group and 18·8 months (16·0-21·2) in the everolimus group. Median overall survival was 21·4 months (95% CI 18·7-not estimable) with cabozantinib and 16·5 months (14·7-18·8) with everolimus (hazard ratio [HR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·53-0·83]; p=0·00026). Cabozantinib treatment also resulted in improved progression-free survival (HR 0·51 [95% CI 0·41-0·62]; p<0·0001) and objective response (17% [13-22] with cabozantinib vs 3% [2-6] with everolimus; p<0·0001) per independent radiology review among all randomised patients. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hypertension (49 [15%] in the cabozantinib group vs 12 [4%] in the everolimus group), diarrhoea (43 [13%] vs 7 [2%]), fatigue (36 [11%] vs 24 [7%]), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (27 [8%] vs 3 [1%]), anaemia (19 [6%] vs 53 [17%]), hyperglycaemia (3 [1%] vs 16 [5%]), and hypomagnesaemia (16 [5%] vs none). Serious adverse events grade 3 or worse occurred in 130 (39%) patients in the cabozantinib group and in 129 (40%) in the everolimus group. One treatment-related death occurred in the cabozantinib group (death; not otherwise specified) and two occurred in the everolimus group (one aspergillus infection and one pneumonia aspiration).nnnINTERPRETATIONnTreatment with cabozantinib increased overall survival, delayed disease progression, and improved the objective response compared with everolimus. Based on these results, cabozantinib should be considered as a new standard-of-care treatment option for previously treated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patients should be monitored for adverse events that might require dose modifications.nnnFUNDINGnExelixis Inc.

Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Patients with Synchronous Metastases from Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium

BACKGROUNDnThe benefit of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for overall survival (OS) is unclear in patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the era of targeted therapy.nnnOBJECTIVEnTo determine OS benefit of CN compared with no CN in mRCC patients treated with targeted therapies.nnnDESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSnRetrospective data from patients with synchronous mRCC (n=1658) from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) were used to compare 982 mRCC patients who had a CN with 676 mRCC patients who did not.nnnOUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSISnOS was compared and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for IMDC poor prognostic criteria.nnnRESULTS AND LIMITATIONSnPatients who had CN had better IMDC prognostic profiles versus those without (favorable, intermediate, or poor in 9%, 63%, and 28% vs 1%, 45%, and 54%, respectively). The median OS of patients with CN versus without CN was 20.6 versus 9.5 mo (p<0.0001). When adjusted for IMDC criteria to correct for imbalances, the HR of death was 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.69; p<0.0001). Patients estimated to survive <12 mo may receive marginal benefit from CN. Patients who have four or more of the IMDC prognostic criteria did not benefit from CN. Data were collected retrospectively.nnnCONCLUSIONSnCN is beneficial in synchronous mRCC patients treated with targeted therapy, even after adjusting for prognostic factors. Patients with estimated survival times <12 mo or four or more IMDC prognostic factors may not benefit from CN. This information may aid in patient selection as we await results from randomized controlled trials.nnnPATIENT SUMMARYnWe looked at the survival outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who did or did not have the primary tumor removed. We found that most patients benefited from tumor removal, except for those with four or more IMDC risk factors.

Incidence and risk of congestive heart failure in patients with renal and nonrenal cell carcinoma treated with sunitinib.

PURPOSEnSunitinib is a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and GI stromal tumor. Congestive heart failure (CHF) is an important adverse effect that has been reported with sunitinib, but overall incidence and relative risk (RR) remain undefined. We performed an up-to-date meta-analysis to determine the risk of developing CHF in patients with both RCC and non-RCC tumors treated with sunitinib.nnnMETHODSnMedline databases were searched for articles published between January 1966 and February 2011. Eligible studies were limited to phase II and III trials of sunitinib with adequate safety reporting in patients with cancer of any tumor type. Summary incidence, RR, and 95% CIs were calculated using random- or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of included studies.nnnRESULTSnA total of 6,935 patients were included. Overall incidence for all- and high-grade CHF in sunitinib-treated patients was 4.1% (95% CI, 1.5% to 10.6%) and 1.5% (95% CI, 0.8% to 3.0%), respectively. RR of all- and high-grade CHF in sunitinib-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients was 1.81 (95% CI, 1.30 to 2.50; P < .001) and 3.30 (95% CI, 1.29 to 8.45; P = .01), respectively. On subgroup analysis, there was no difference observed in CHF incidence for patients with RCC versus non-RCC or in trials with or without cardiac monitoring. No evidence of publication bias was observed.nnnCONCLUSIONnSunitinib use is associated with increased risk of CHF in patients with cancer.

Prognostic Model for Survival in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Kidney Cancer Working Group

Purpose: To develop a single validated model for survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using a comprehensive international database. Experimental Design: A comprehensive database of 3,748 patients including previously reported clinical prognostic factors was established by pooling patient-level data from clinical trials. Following quality control and standardization, descriptive statistics were generated. Univariate analyses were conducted using proportional hazards models. Multivariable analysis using a log–logistic model stratified by center and multivariable fractional polynomials was conducted to identify independent predictors of survival. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation methods. Three risk groups were formed using the 25th and 75th percentiles of the resulting prognostic index. The model was validated using an independent data set of 645 patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. Results: Median survival in the favorable, intermediate and poor risk groups was 26.9 months, 11.5 months, and 4.2 months, respectively. Factors contributing to the prognostic index included treatment, performance status, number of metastatic sites, time from diagnosis to treatment, and pretreatment hemoglobin, white blood count, lactate dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase, and serum calcium. The model showed good concordance when tested among patients treated with TKI therapy (C statistic = 0.741, 95% CI: 0.714–0.768). Conclusions: Nine clinical factors can be used to model survival in mRCC and form distinct prognostic groups. The model shows utility among patients treated in the TKI era. Clin Cancer Res; 17(16); 5443–50. ©2011 AACR.

Sunitinib rechallenge in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients

Sunitinib was a standard initial therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Given the fact that many patients progressed through many available therapies and antitumor activity had been demonstrated with sequential vascular endothelial growth factor‐targeting approaches, a retrospective review was performed of the experience of rechallenge with sunitinib in sunitinib‐refractory mRCC.

The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model as a prognostic tool in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma previously treated with first-line targeted therapy: a population-based study

BACKGROUNDnPrevious prognostic models for second-line systemic therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma have not been studied in the setting of targeted therapy. We sought to validate the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving next-line targeted therapy after progression on first-line targeted therapy.nnnMETHODSnIn this population-based study, we analysed patients who received second-line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma at 19 centres in Canada, USA, Greece, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Denmark. The primary endpoint was overall survival since the initiation of second-line therapy. We compared the prognostic performance of the IMDC model with the three-factor MSKCC model used for previously treated patients for overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy.nnnFINDINGSnBetween Jan 1, 2005, and Nov 30, 2012, we included 1021 patients treated with second-line targeted therapy. Median overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy was 12·5 months (95% CI 11·3-14·3). Five of six predefined factors in the IMDC model (anaemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, Karnofsky performance status [KPS] <80, and <1 year from diagnosis to first-line targeted therapy) were independent predictors of poor overall survival on multivariable analysis. The concordance index using all six prognostic factors (ie, also including hypercalcaemia) was 0·70 (95% CI 0·67-0·72) with the IMDC model and was 0·66 (95% CI 0·64-0·68) with the three-factor MSKCC model. When patients were divided into three risk categories using IMDC criteria, median overall survival was 35·3 months (95% CI 28·3-47·8) in the favourable risk group (n=76), 16·6 months (14·9-17·9) in the intermediate risk group (n=529), and 5·4 months (4·7-6·8) in the poor risk group (n=261).nnnINTERPRETATIONnThe IMDC prognostic model can be applied to patients previously treated with targeted therapy, in addition to previously validated populations in first-line targeted therapy. The IMDC prognostic model in the second-line targeted therapy setting has an improved prognostic performance and is applicable to a more contemporary patient cohort than that of the three-factor MSKCC model.nnnFUNDINGnDF/HCC Kidney Cancer SPORE P50 CA101942-01, Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada, Canadian Institute for Health Research, Trust Family, Loker Pinard, Michael Brigham, and Gerald DeWulf.

Comparison of four early posttherapy imaging changes (EPTIC; RECIST 1.0, tumor shrinkage, computed tomography tumor density, Choi criteria) in assessing outcome to vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUNDnVascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy has become standard treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Since these therapies can induce tumor necrosis and minimal tumor shrinkage, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) may not be optimal for predicting clinical outcome.nnnOBJECTIVEnTo systematically determine the optimal early posttherapy imaging changes (EPTIC) to separate responders and nonresponders at the first posttreatment follow-up computed tomography (CT).nnnDESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSnSeventy mRCC patients with 155 target lesions treated with first-line sunitinib, sorafenib, or bevacizumab at academic medical centers underwent contrast-enhanced thoracic and abdominal CT at baseline and first follow-up after therapy initiation (median: 78 d after therapy initiation; range: 31-223 d).nnnMEASUREMENTSnEvaluations were performed according to (1) RECIST 1.0; (2) Choi criteria; (3) tumor shrinkage (TS) of ≥10% decrease in sum of the longest unidimensional diameter (SLD); and (4) 15% or 20% decrease in mean CT tumor density. Correlation with time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were compared and stratified by response to each of the radiologic criteria.nnnRESULTS AND LIMITATIONSnEleven patients were considered responders by RECIST 1.0; 49 based on Choi criteria; 31 patients had ≥10% decrease in the SLD; and 36 and 32 patients had ≥15% and ≥20% decrease, respectively, in mean tumor density on CT. Only the threshold of 10% decrease in the SLD was statistically significant in predicting TTF (10.4 vs 5.1 mo; p=0.02) and OS (32.5 vs 15.8 mo; p=0.002). Receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded a 10% decrease in SLD as the optimal size change threshold for responders. The retrospective nature of the study and measurements by a single oncoradiologist are inherent limitations.nnnCONCLUSIONSnIn the retrospectively analyzed study population of mRCC patients receiving VEGF-targeted agents, a 10% reduction in the SLD on the first follow-up CT was an optimal early predictor of outcome.