Jennifer J. Knox

Prognostic Factors for Overall Survival in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor–Targeted Agents: Results From a Large, Multicenter Study

PURPOSEnThere are no robust data on prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) -targeted therapy.nnnMETHODSnBaseline characteristics and outcomes on 645 patients with anti-VEGF therapy-naïve metastatic RCC were collected from three US and four Canadian cancer centers. Cox proportional hazards regression, followed by bootstrap validation, was used to identify independent prognostic factors for OS.nnnRESULTSnThe median OS for the whole cohort was 22 months (95% CI, 20.2 to 26.5 months), and the median follow-up was 24.5 months. Overall, 396, 200, and 49 patients were treated with sunitinib, sorafenib, and bevacizumab, respectively. Four of the five adverse prognostic factors according to the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) were independent predictors of short survival: hemoglobin less than the lower limit of normal (P < .0001), corrected calcium greater than the upper limit of normal (ULN; P = .0006), Karnofsky performance status less than 80% (P < .0001), and time from diagnosis to treatment of less than 1 year (P = .01). In addition, neutrophils greater than the ULN (P < .0001) and platelets greater than the ULN (P = .01) were independent adverse prognostic factors. Patients were segregated into three risk categories: the favorable-risk group (no prognostic factors; n = 133), in which median OS (mOS) was not reached and 2-year OS (2y OS) was 75%; the intermediate-risk group (one or two prognostic factors; n = 301), in which mOS was 27 months and 2y OS was 53%; and the poor-risk group (three to six prognostic factors; n = 152), in which mOS was 8.8 months and 2y OS was 7% (log-rank P < .0001). The C-index was 0.73.nnnCONCLUSIONnThis model validates components of the MSKCC model with the addition of platelet and neutrophil counts and can be incorporated into patient care and into clinical trials that use VEGF-targeted agents.

Phase II Randomized Trial Comparing Sequential First-Line Everolimus and Second-Line Sunitinib Versus First-Line Sunitinib and Second-Line Everolimus in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSEnA multicenter, randomized phase II trial, RECORD-3, was conducted to compare first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression with the standard sequence of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnRECORD-3 used a crossover treatment design. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) noninferiority of first-line everolimus compared with first-line sunitinib. Secondary end points included combined PFS for each sequence, overall survival (OS), and safety.nnnRESULTSnOf 471 enrolled patients, 238 were randomly assigned to first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib, and 233 were randomly assigned to first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus. The primary end point was not met; the median PFS was 7.9 months for first-line everolimus and 10.7 months for first-line sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Among patients who discontinued first-line, 108 (45%) crossed over from everolimus to second-line sunitinib, and 99 (43%) crossed over from sunitinib to second-line everolimus. The median combined PFS was 21.1 months for sequential everolimus then sunitinib and was 25.8 months for sequential sunitinib then everolimus (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.7). The median OS was 22.4 months for sequential everolimus and then sunitinib and 32.0 months for sequential sunitinib and then everolimus (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.6). Common treatment-emergent adverse events during first-line everolimus or sunitinib were stomatitis (53% and 57%, respectively), fatigue (45% and 51%, respectively), and diarrhea (38% and 57%, respectively).nnnCONCLUSIONnEverolimus did not demonstrate noninferiority compared with sunitinib as a first-line therapy. The trial results support the standard treatment paradigm of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression.

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.

Expanded phase II trial of gemcitabine and capecitabine for advanced biliary cancer

A phase 2 trial of gemcitabine and capecitabine (GemCap) in patients with advanced biliary cancer led to an objective response in approximately 30% of patients and a median survival of 14 months. In the current study, the authors report further efficacy data of a larger cohort of such patients treated with the GemCap regimen.

Primary anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma: clinical characteristics, risk factors, and subsequent therapy

BACKGROUNDnA subset of patients treated with initial anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy exhibit progressive disease (PD) as the best response per RECIST criteria.nnnMETHODSnData from patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with anti-VEGF therapy were collected through the International mRCC Database Consortium from 12 centers.nnnRESULTSnOne thousand and fifty-six assessable patients received initial VEGF inhibitors and 272 (26%) of these patients had PD as best response. Initial treatment included sunitinib (n = 203), sorafenib (n = 51), or bevacizumab (n = 18). Six percent of patients were at favorable risk, 55% at intermediate risk, and 39% at poor risk. On multivariable analysis, predictors of PD were Karnofsky performance status < 80% [odds ratio (OR) = 2.3, P < 0.0001], diagnosis to treatment < 1 year (OR = 2.1, P < 0.0001), neutrophilia (OR = 1.9, P = 0.0021), thrombocytosis (OR = 1.7, P = 0.0068), and anemia (OR = 1.6, P = 0.0058). Median progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with PD versus without PD was 2.4 versus 11 months (P < 0.0001) and overall survival (OS) was 6.8 versus 29 months (P < 0.0001), respectively. One hundred and eight (40%) VEGF-refractory patients proceeded to receive further systemic therapies. Response rate, PFS, and OS for subsequent therapy were 9%, 2.5 months, and 7.4 months, respectively, with no statistical differences between patients who received VEGF versus mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors.nnnCONCLUSIONSnPrimary anti-VEGF-refractory mRCC patients have a dismal prognosis. Second-line anti-mTOR and anti-VEGF agents produce similar outcomes.

Metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapy agents: Characterization of survival outcome and application of the International mRCC Database Consortium criteria

This study aimed to apply the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model in metastatic non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC). In addition, the survival outcome of metastatic nccRCC patients was characterized.

Conditional survival of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma treated with VEGF-targeted therapy: a population-based study

BACKGROUNDnThe advent of targeted therapies in the past 7 years has extended median survival for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. This improvement in clinical outcome has created a need for new, more accurate prognostic measures. We assessed the use of conditional survival--a measure that accounts for elapsed time since treatment initiation--for prognostication in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma treated with first-line VEGF-targeted therapies.nnnMETHODSnWe obtained data for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma who were treated with a first-line VEGF-targeted therapy between April 7, 2003, and Oct 12, 2010, from our large multi-institutional International mRCC Database Consortium (centres in Canada, the USA, Singapore, Denmark, and South Korea). All histologies, performance statuses, and prognostic risk groups were included. The primary outcome was 2-year conditional survival, defined as the probability of surviving an additional 2 years from a given timepoint since the start of targeted therapy. Secondary analyses included 1-year and 3-year conditional survival, along with stratification of patients by Heng prognostic risk criteria and Karnofsky performance score, and conditional survival based on length of time on therapy. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and a landmark analysis to calculate conditional survival.nnnFINDINGSnIn the 1673 patients analysed, median follow-up for alive patients was 20·1 months (IQR 9·0-34·4). We recorded an increase in the 2-year conditional survival probability from 44% (95% CI 41-47) at 0 months to 51% (46-55) at 18 months since beginning targeted therapy. When stratified by the Heng prognostic risk criteria defined at therapy initiation, 2-year conditional survival changed little in the favourable and intermediate groups, but in the poor-risk group, 2-year conditional survival improved from 11% (8-15) at 0 months to 33% (18-48) after 18 months. When conditioned on time on targeted therapy from 0 months to 18 months, 2-year conditional survival improved from 44% (41-47) to 68% (60-75) in the overall population and from 74% (68-79) to 90% (77-96) in the favourable group, 49% (45-53) to 57% (45-67) in the intermediate group, and 11% (8-15) to 73% (43-89) in the poor risk group.nnnINTERPRETATIONnConditional survival is a clinically useful prediction measure that adjusts prognosis of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma on the basis of survival since treatment initiation or therapy duration. Conditional survival might be especially relevant to adjust prognosis for poor-risk patients.nnnFUNDINGnThe Trust Family Fund for Kidney Cancer Research.

Outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma that do not meet eligibility criteria for clinical trials

BACKGROUNDnTargeted therapies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have been approved based on registration clinical trials that have strict eligibility criteria. The clinical outcomes of patients treated with targeted agents but are ineligible for trials are unknown.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnmRCC patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy were retrospectively deemed ineligible for clinical trials (according to commonly used inclusion/exclusion criteria) if they had a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) <70%, nonclear-cell histology, brain metastases, hemoglobin ≤9 g/dl, creatinine >2× the upper limit of normal, corrected calcium ≥12 mg/dl, platelet count of <100 × 10(3)/uL, or neutrophil count <1500/mm(3).nnnRESULTSnOverall, 768 of 2210 (35%) patients in the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) were deemed ineligible for clinical trials by the above criteria. Between ineligible versus eligible patients, the response rate, median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival of first-line targeted therapy were 22% versus 29% (P = 0.0005), 5.2 versus 8.6 months, and 12.5 versus 28.4 months (both P < 0.0001), respectively. Second-line PFS (if applicable) was 2.8 months in the trial ineligible versus 4.3 months in the trial eligible patients (P = 0.0039). When adjusted by the IMDC prognostic categories, the HR for death between trial ineligible and trial eligible patients was 1.55 (95% confidence interval 1.378-1.751, P < 0.0001).nnnCONCLUSIONSnThe number of patients that are ineligible for clinical trials is substantial and their outcomes are inferior. Specific trials addressing the unmet needs of protocol ineligible patients are warranted.

Progression‐free survival as a predictor of overall survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with contemporary targeted therapy

The majority of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) clinical trials that examined targeted agents used progression‐free survival (PFS) as the primary endpoint. Whether PFS can be used as a predictor of overall survival (OS) is unknown.

Clinical variables associated with PSA response to abiraterone acetate in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUNDnAbiraterone acetate (abiraterone) prolongs overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This studys objective was to retrospectively identify factors associated with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response to abiraterone and validate them in an independent cohort. We hypothesized that the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), thought to be an indirect manifestation of tumor-promoting inflammation, may be associated with response to abiraterone.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnAll patients receiving abiraterone at the Princess Margaret (PM) Cancer Centre up to March 2013 were reviewed. The primary end point was confirmed PSA response defined as PSA decline ≥50% below baseline maintained for ≥3 weeks. Potential factors associated with PSA response were analyzed using univariate and multivariable analyses to generate a score, which was then evaluated in an independent cohort from Royal Marsden (RM) NHS foundation.nnnRESULTSnA confirmed PSA response was observed in 44 out of 108 assessable patients (41%, 95% confidence interval 31%-50%). In univariate analysis, lower pre-abiraterone baseline levels of lactate dehydrogenase, an NLR ≤ 5 and restricted metastatic spread to either bone or lymph nodes were each associated with PSA response. In multivariable analysis, only low NLR and restricted metastatic spread remained statistically significant. A score derived as the sum of these two categorical variables was associated with response to abiraterone (P = 0.007). Logistic regression analysis on an independent validation cohort of 245 patients verified that this score was associated with response to abiraterone (P = 0.003). It was also associated with OS in an exploratory analysis.nnnCONCLUSIONSnA composite score of baseline NLR and extent of metastatic spread is associated with PSA response to abiraterone and OS. Our data may help understand the role of systemic inflammation in mCRPC and warrant further research.BACKGROUNDnAbiraterone acetate (abiraterone) prolongs overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This studys objective was to retrospectively identify factors associated with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response to abiraterone and validate them in an independent cohort. We hypothesized that the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), thought to be an indirect manifestation of tumor-promoting inflammation, may be associated with response to abiraterone.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnAll patients receiving abiraterone at the Princess Margaret (PM) Cancer Centre up to March 2013 were reviewed. The primary end point was confirmed PSA response defined as PSA decline ≥50% below baseline maintained for ≥3 weeks. Potential factors associated with PSA response were analyzed using univariate and multivariable analyses to generate a score, which was then evaluated in an independent cohort from Royal Marsden (RM) NHS foundation.nnnRESULTSnA confirmed PSA response was observed in 44 out of 108 assessable patients (41%, 95% confidence interval 31%-50%). In univariate analysis, lower pre-abiraterone baseline levels of lactate dehydrogenase, an NLR ≤ 5 and restricted metastatic spread to either bone or lymph nodes were each associated with PSA response. In multivariable analysis, only low NLR and restricted metastatic spread remained statistically significant. A score derived as the sum of these two categorical variables was associated with response to abiraterone (P = 0.007). Logistic regression analysis on an independent validation cohort of 245 patients verified that this score was associated with response to abiraterone (P = 0.003). It was also associated with OS in an exploratory analysis.nnnCONCLUSIONSnA composite score of baseline NLR and extent of metastatic spread is associated with PSA response to abiraterone and OS. Our data may help understand the role of systemic inflammation in mCRPC and warrant further research.