Survival outcomes associated with different sunitinib dosing regimens in metastatic renal cell carcinoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winnie Cheng ◽  
Victoria Kletas ◽  
Christian Kollmannsberger ◽  
Mário de Lemos

Background Standard dosing regimen of sunitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma consists of four weeks treatment followed by two weeks rest (intermittent dosing). Alternative regimens have been suggested, including continuous daily dosing (continuous dosing) and non-conventional dosing (non-conventional dosing: e.g. two weeks on/one week off, non-conventional dosing), to provide more individualized therapy with less toxicities. It is unclear whether non-standard sunitinib dosing affects survival outcomes. Patients Metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with sunitinib between 1 July 2007 and 1 July 2011 at our institution. Methods Medical records and dispensing data were reviewed retrospectively to categorize sunitinib dosing as intermittent dosing, continuous dosing, or non-conventional dosing. Primary outcome was to compare overall survival associated with varying regimens, with secondary outcomes of progression-free survival and incidence of treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects. Results A total of 180 patients were identified. Most patients received intermittent dosing ( n = 120, 67%), followed by continuous dosing ( n = 32, 18%) and non-conventional dosing ( n = 28, 16%). Compared to intermittent dosing, continuous dosing was associated with similar overall survival (median 9 vs. 13 months, HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.43–1.06, p = 0.088) while non-conventional dosing was associated with significantly longer overall survival (median 9 vs. 23 months, HR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.34–0.90, p = 0.016). Progression-free survival was significantly better for continuous dosing (median 4 vs. 9 months, HR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.40–0.94, p = 0.025) and non-conventional dosing (median 4 vs. 10 months, HR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39–0.95, p = 0.03) when compared to intermittent dosing. Similar to prior sunitinib trials, a significant proportion of patients (20%) discontinued sunitinib therapy due to adverse effects. Conclusions Based on retrospective, real-world data, alternative sunitinib dosing regimens appear to be viable options for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.






2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 417-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winnie Cheng ◽  
Victoria Kletas ◽  
Mario Law De Lemos ◽  
Sally Man ◽  
Christian K. Kollmannsberger

417 Background: Standard dosing regimen of sunitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) consists of 4 weeks treatment followed by 2-weeks rest (intermittent dosing, ID). Alternative regimens have been suggested, including continuous daily dosing (continuous dosing, CD) and non-conventional dosing (non-conventional dosing: e.g. 2 weeks on / 1-week off, ND) to provide more individualized therapy with less toxicities. It is unclear whether non-standard sunitinib dosing affects survival outcomes. Methods: mRCC patients treated with sunitinib between July 1, 2007 and July 1, 2011 were identified from the British Columbia Cancer Agency (BCCA) pharmacy database, a publicly funded cancer care organization. Medical records and dispensing data were reviewed retrospectively to categorize sunitinib dosing as ID, CD or ND. Primary outcome was to compare overall survival (OS) associated with varying regimens, with secondary outcomes of progression free survival (PFS) and incidence of treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects (AE). Results: A total of 180 patients were identified. Heng prognostic risk criteria were assessable in 162 patients. Of these, 34 (21%), 80 (49%) and 48 (30%) had low-, intermediate- and high-risk disease. Most patients received ID (120, 67%), followed by CD (32,18%) and ND (28,16%). Compared to ID, CD was associated with similar OS (median 9 vs. 13 months, HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43-1.06, p=0.088) while ND was associated with significantly longer OS (median 9 vs. 23 months, HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.90, p=0.016). PFS was significantly better for CD (median 4 vs. 9 months, HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.94, p=0.025) and ND (median 4 vs. 10 months, HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.95, p=0.03) when compared to ID. Similar to prior sunitinib trials, a significant proportion of patients (20%) discontinued sunitinib therapy due to AE. Conclusions: In comparison to the standard ID regimen, dosing sunitinib with alternative regimens appears to be associated with improved OS and PFS in patients with mRCC. Presently, a prospective Canadian trial is underway investigating the efficacy and safety of individualized sunitinib dosing regimens.







2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 686-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renee K. McAlister ◽  
Jonathan Aston ◽  
Megan Pollack ◽  
Liping Du ◽  
Tatsuki Koyama ◽  
...  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document