The randomised phase 2 CABOSUN trial comparing cabozantinib with sunitinib as initial therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk met the primary end-point of ...improving progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by investigator. We report PFS by independent radiology review committee (IRC) assessment, ORR per IRC and updated overall survival (OS).
Previously untreated patients with advanced RCC of intermediate or poor risk by IMDC criteria were randomised 1:1 to cabozantinib 60 mg daily or sunitinib 50 mg daily (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Stratification was by risk group and presence of bone metastases.
A total of 157 patients were randomised 1:1 to cabozantinib (n = 79) or sunitinib (n = 78). Median PFS per IRC was 8.6 months (95% confidence interval CI 6.8–14.0) versus 5.3 months (95% CI 3.0–8.2) for cabozantinib versus sunitinib (hazard ratio HR 0.48 95% CI 0.31–0.74; two-sided p = 0.0008), and ORR per IRC was 20% (95% CI 12.0–30.8) versus 9% (95% CI 3.7–17.6), respectively. Subgroup analyses of PFS by stratification factors and MET tumour expression were consistent with results for the overall population. With a median follow-up of 34.5 months, median OS was 26.6 months (95% CI 14.6–not estimable) with cabozantinib and 21.2 months (95% CI 16.3–27.4) with sunitinib (HR 0.80 95% CI 0.53–1.21. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 68% for cabozantinib and 65% for sunitinib.
In this phase 2 trial, cabozantinib treatment significantly prolonged PFS per IRC compared with sunitinib as initial systemic therapy for advanced RCC of poor or intermediate risk.
NCT01835158.
•Cabozantinib was evaluated vs sunitinib as initial therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma(aRCC) of intermediate/poor risk.•Improved progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator with cabozantinib was previously reported.•PFS per independent assessment was significantly prolonged with cabozantinib.•PFS for subgroups were consistent with results for the overall population.•Cabozantinib may be an initial treatment option for patients with aRCC of intermediate or poor risk.
Evolving treatments, disease phenotypes, and biology, together with a changing drug development environment, have created the need to revise castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) clinical trial ...recommendations to succeed those from prior Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Groups.
An international expert committee of prostate cancer clinical investigators (the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 PCWG3) was reconvened and expanded and met in 2012-2015 to formulate updated criteria on the basis of emerging trial data and validation studies of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 2 recommendations.
PCWG3 recommends that baseline patient assessment include tumor histology, detailed records of prior systemic treatments and responses, and a detailed reporting of disease subtypes based on an anatomic pattern of metastatic spread. New recommendations for trial outcome measures include the time to event end point of symptomatic skeletal events, as well as time to first metastasis and time to progression for trials in the nonmetastatic CRPC state. PCWG3 introduces the concept of no longer clinically benefiting to underscore the distinction between first evidence of progression and the clinical need to terminate or change treatment, and the importance of documenting progression in existing lesions as distinct from the development of new lesions. Serial biologic profiling using tumor samples from biopsies, blood-based diagnostics, and/or imaging is also recommended to gain insight into mechanisms of resistance and to identify predictive biomarkers of sensitivity for use in prospective trials.
PCWG3 moves drug development closer to unmet needs in clinical practice by focusing on disease manifestations most likely to affect prognosis adversely for therapeutics tested in both nonmetastatic and metastatic CRPC populations. Consultation with regulatory authorities is recommended if a trial is intended to seek support for drug approval.
Androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) results in a truncated receptor, which leads to ligand-independent constitutive activation that is not inhibited by anti-androgen therapies, including ...abiraterone or enzalutamide. Given that previous reports suggested that circulating tumor cell (CTC) AR-V7 detection is a poor prognostic indicator for the clinical efficacy of secondary hormone therapies, we conducted a prospective multicenter validation study.
PROPHECY ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02269982) is a multicenter, prospective-blinded study of men with high-risk mCRPC starting abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide treatment. The primary objective was to validate the prognostic significance of baseline CTC AR-V7 on the basis of radiographic or clinical progression free-survival (PFS) by using the Johns Hopkins University modified-AdnaTest CTC AR-V7 mRNA assay and the Epic Sciences CTC nuclear-specific AR-V7 protein assay. Overall survival (OS) and prostate-specific antigen responses were secondary end points.
We enrolled 118 men with mCRPC who were starting abiraterone or enzalutamide treatment. AR-V7 detection by both the Johns Hopkins and Epic AR-V7 assays was independently associated with shorter PFS (hazard ratio, 1.9 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.3;
= .032 and 2.4 95% CI, 1.1 to 5.1;
= .020, respectively) and OS (hazard ratio, 4.2 95% CI, 2.1 to 8.5 and 3.5 95% CI, 1.6 to 8.1, respectively) after adjusting for CTC number and clinical prognostic factors. Men with AR-V7-positive mCRPC had fewer confirmed prostate-specific antigen responses (0% to 11%) or soft tissue responses (0% to 6%). The observed percentage agreement between the two AR-V7 assays was 82%.
Detection of AR-V7 in CTCs by two blood-based assays is independently associated with shorter PFS and OS with abiraterone or enzalutamide, and such men with mCRPC should be offered alternative treatments.
Purpose Adjuvant therapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localized prostate cancer decreases the number of deaths from this disease. Surrogates for overall survival (OS) could expedite the ...evaluation of new adjuvant therapies. Methods By June 2013, 102 completed or ongoing randomized trials were identified and individual patient data were collected from 28 trials with 28,905 patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) were determined for 21,140 patients from 24 trials and 12,712 patients from 19 trials, respectively. We evaluated the surrogacy of DFS and MFS for OS by using a two-stage meta-analytic validation model by determining the correlation of an intermediate clinical end point with OS and the correlation of treatment effects on both the intermediate clinical end point and OS. Results Trials enrolled patients from 1987 to 2011. After a median follow-up of 10 years, 45% of 21,140 men and 45% of 12,712 men experienced a DFS and MFS event, respectively. For DFS and MFS, 61% and 90% of the patients, respectively, were from radiation trials, and 63% and 66%, respectively, had high-risk disease. At the patient level, Kendall's τ correlation with OS was 0.85 and 0.91 for DFS and MFS, respectively. At the trial level, R
was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.88) from weighted linear regression of 8-year OS rates versus 5-year DFS and MFS rates, respectively. Treatment effects-measured by log hazard ratios-for the surrogates and OS were well correlated ( R
, 0.73 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.82 for DFS and 0.92 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.95 for MFS). Conclusion MFS is a strong surrogate for OS for localized prostate cancer that is associated with a significant risk of death from prostate cancer.
Prognostic models for overall survival (OS) for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are dated and do not reflect significant advances in treatment options available ...for these patients. This work developed and validated an updated prognostic model to predict OS in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy.
Data from a phase III trial of 1,050 patients with mCRPC were used (Cancer and Leukemia Group B CALGB-90401 Alliance). The data were randomly split into training and testing sets. A separate phase III trial served as an independent validation set. Adaptive least absolute shrinkage and selection operator selected eight factors prognostic for OS. A predictive score was computed from the regression coefficients and used to classify patients into low- and high-risk groups. The model was assessed for its predictive accuracy using the time-dependent area under the curve (tAUC).
The model included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, disease site, lactate dehydrogenase, opioid analgesic use, albumin, hemoglobin, prostate-specific antigen, and alkaline phosphatase. Median OS values in the high- and low-risk groups, respectively, in the testing set were 17 and 30 months (hazard ratio HR, 2.2; P < .001); in the validation set they were 14 and 26 months (HR, 2.9; P < .001). The tAUCs were 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.73) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.76) in the testing and validation sets, respectively.
An updated prognostic model for OS in patients with mCRPC receiving first-line chemotherapy was developed and validated on an external set. This model can be used to predict OS, as well as to better select patients to participate in trials on the basis of their prognosis.
Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) is an enzyme involved in anaerobic glycolysis and regulated by the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)-containing complex 1 ...(PI3K/Akt/TORC1) pathway as well as tumor hypoxia/necrosis. High serum LDH levels are associated with poor prognosis in patients with cancer, including renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We tested whether serum LDH is prognostic and has predictive value in patients with metastatic RCC receiving an mTOR inhibitor.
We evaluated pretreatment and post-treatment serum LDH in 404 poor-risk patients with RCC treated with the TORC1 inhibitor temsirolimus or interferon alfa in an international phase III randomized trial. The proportional hazards model was used to test for the prognostic and predictive association of LDH in predicting overall survival (OS).
Mean baseline serum normalized LDH was 1.23 times the upper limit of normal (ULN; range, 0.05 to 28.5 × ULN). The multivariable hazard ratio for death was 2.81 (95% CI, 2.01 to 3.94; P < .001) for patients with LDH more than 1 × ULN versus patients with LDH ≤ 1 × ULN. The LDH-treatment interaction term was statistically significant for OS (P = .016). Among 140 patients with LDH above the ULN, OS was significantly improved with temsirolimus (6.9 v 4.2 months; P < .002). Among 264 patients with normal LDH, OS was not significantly improved with temsirolimus as compared with interferon therapy (11.7 v 10.4 months; P = .514).
Serum LDH is a prognostic and a predictive biomarker for the survival benefit conferred by TORC1 inhibition in poor-risk RCC. Further investigation of the predictive role of LDH as a measure of benefit with PI3K/TORC1 pathway inhibition in other RCC risk groups and other tumor types is warranted.
A randomized, placebo-controlled study based on preclinical and clinical data that supports the potential role of vascular endothelial growth factor in prostate cancer was performed to evaluate the ...addition of bevacizumab to standard docetaxel and prednisone therapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
Patients with chemotherapy-naive progressive mCRPC with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2 and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) over 1 hour for 21 days plus prednisone 5 mg orally twice per day (DP) with either bevacizumab 15 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks (DP + B) or placebo. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), 50% decline in prostate-specific antigen, objective response (OR), and toxicity.
In total, 1,050 patients were randomly assigned. The median OS for patients given DP + B was 22.6 months compared with 21.5 months for patients treated with DP (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.05; stratified log-rank P = .181). The median PFS time was superior in the DP + B arm (9.9 v 7.5 months, stratified log-rank P < .001) as was the proportion of patients with OR (49.4% v 35.5%; P = .0013). Grade 3 or greater treatment-related toxicity was more common with DP + B (75.4% v 56.2%; P ≤ .001), as was the number of treatment-related deaths (4.0% v 1.2%; P = .005).
Despite an improvement in PFS and OR, the addition of bevacizumab to docetaxel and prednisone did not improve OS in men with mCRPC and was associated with greater toxicity.
Bevacizumab is an antibody that binds vascular endothelial growth factor and has activity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Interferon alfa (IFN-alpha) is the historic standard initial ...treatment for RCC. A prospective, randomized, phase III trial of bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha versus IFN-alpha monotherapy was conducted.
Patients with previously untreated, metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to receive either bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus IFN-alpha (9 million units subcutaneously three times weekly) or the same dose and schedule of IFN-alpha monotherapy in a multicenter phase III trial. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and safety.
Seven hundred thirty-two patients were enrolled. The median OS time was 18.3 months (95% CI, 16.5 to 22.5 months) for bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha and 17.4 months (95% CI, 14.4 to 20.0 months) for IFN-alpha monotherapy (unstratified log-rank P = .097). Adjusting on stratification factors, the hazard ratio was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01; stratified log-rank P = .069) favoring bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha. There was significantly more grade 3 to 4 hypertension (HTN), anorexia, fatigue, and proteinuria for bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha. Patients who developed HTN on bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha had a significantly improved PFS and OS versus patients without HTN.
OS favored the bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha arm but did not meet the predefined criteria for significance. HTN may be a biomarker of outcome with bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha.
Integrating diverse types of prognostic information into accurate, individualized estimates of outcome in colorectal cancer is challenging. Significant heterogeneity in colorectal cancer ...prognostication tool quality exists. Methodology is incompletely or inadequately reported. Evaluations of the internal or external validity of the prognostic model are rarely performed. Prognostication tools are important devices for patient management, but tool reliability is compromised by poor quality. Guidance for future development of prognostication tools in colorectal cancer is needed.
Summary Background Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to ...compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Methods We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01108445. Findings Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months 80% CI 5·8–11·4 vs 5·6 months 5·5–6·0; hazard ratio 1·41 80% CI 1·03–1·92; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3–4 adverse events were hypertension (12 24% of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one 2% of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six 12% vs four 7%), diarrhoea (five 10% vs one 2%), pneumonitis (none vs five 9%), stomatitis (none vs five 9%), and hand-foot syndrome (four 8% vs none). Interpretation In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors. Funding Novartis and Pfizer.
PDF
