Phase II Study of Axitinib in Sorafenib-Refractory Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (27) ◽  
pp. 4462-4468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
George Wilding ◽  
Gary Hudes ◽  
Walter M. Stadler ◽  
Sinil Kim ◽  
...  

PurposeTo investigate the efficacy and safety of axitinib, an oral, potent, and selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors 1, 2, and 3 in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) refractory to prior therapies that included, but were not limited to, sorafenib.Patients and MethodsIn this multicenter, open-label, phase II study, patients with sorafenib-refractory mRCC received a starting dose of axitinib 5 mg orally twice daily. A one-arm, single-stage design was used to estimate the primary end point of objective response rate (ORR), defined by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors). Secondary end points included safety, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and patient-reported outcomes.ResultsOf 62 patients recruited, 100% had received prior sorafenib, and 74.2% had received two or more prior systemic treatments. The axitinib dose was titrated to greater than 5 mg twice daily in 53.2% of patients, and 35.5% of patients had the dose modified to less than 5 mg twice daily. In 62 patients evaluable for response, the ORR was 22.6%, and the median duration of response was 17.5 months. Median PFS and OS times were 7.4 months (95% CI, 6.7 to 11.0 months) and 13.6 months (95% CI, 8.4 to 18.8 months), respectively. All-causality grade 3 to 4 adverse events included hand-foot syndrome (16.1%), fatigue (16.1%), hypertension (16.1%), dyspnea (14.5%), diarrhea (14.5%), dehydration (8.1%), and hypotension (6.5%).ConclusionAxitinib has antitumor activity in patients with mRCC refractory to prior VEGF-targeted therapy, including sorafenib. Toxicities were mild to moderate and were manageable. A randomized, phase III trial to compare axitinib with sorafenib in patients who have mRCC refractory to one prior first-line therapy regimen is underway.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4546-4546 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Dror Michaelson ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Bernard J. Escudier ◽  
Joseph Clark ◽  
Bruce Redman ◽  
...  

4546 Background: Axitinib, a potent and selective second-generation inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the phase III AXIS trial. In patients previously treated with cytokines, median PFS (mPFS) was 12.1 mo. In a prior phase II study of axitinib for cytokine-refractory mRCC, mPFS was 13.7 mo and the 5-yr overall survival (OS) rate was 20.6%. We report updated PFS and OS for cytokine-treated patients from the AXIS trial. Methods: 723 patients with clear-cell mRCC and progressive disease after 1 systemic therapy were enrolled, of whom 251 received prior interleukin-2 (IL-2) or interferon-α (IFN-α). Patients were randomized 1:1 to axitinib (5 mg twice daily [BID] starting dose) or sorafenib (400 mg BID). Results: As of Jun 3, 2011, mPFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) for cytokine-treated patients was 12.0 mo (10.1, 13.9) with axitinib (n=126) vs 6.6 mo (6.4, 8.3) with sorafenib (n=125): hazard ratio [HR] (95% CI) 0.519 (0.375, 0.720); p<0.0001. For those treated with an IL-2-containing regimen, mPFS (95% CI) was 15.7 mo (8.3, 19.4) with axitinib (n=37) vs 8.3 mo (4.7, 15.7) with sorafenib (n=38). For those treated with IFN-α alone, mPFS (95% CI) was 12.0 mo (10.0, 13.8) with axitinib (n=89) vs 6.5 mo (6.4, 8.2) with sorafenib (n=87). As of Nov 1, 2011, median OS (95% CI) in the cytokine-treated subgroup was 29.4 mo (24.5, not estimable) with axitinib vs 27.8 mo (23.1, 34.5) with sorafenib: HR (95% CI) 0.813 (0.555, 1.191); p=0.144. Adverse event (AE) profiles were similar in both arms. Few cytokine-treated patients (5.6%) discontinued axitinib due to toxicity. AEs reported in >25% of cytokine-treated patients receiving axitinib were diarrhea (49.2%), hypertension (47.6%), fatigue (35.7%), dysphonia (29.4%), and hand–foot syndrome (28.6%). Conclusions: Axitinib showed median PFS and OS of 1 and 2.5 yr, respectively, in cytokine-treated patients, confirming prior phase II study results, and was well tolerated. PFS was superior to that of sorafenib in second-line mRCC and compares favorably with historical results of other agents in second-line mRCC.


2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren C. Harshman ◽  
Sarah Barbeau ◽  
Alex McMillian ◽  
Sandy Srinivas

1994 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Haarstad ◽  
A.-B. Jacobsen ◽  
S.A. Schjølseth ◽  
T. Risberg ◽  
S.D. Fosså

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 429-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Goldstein ◽  
S. P. Ackland ◽  
D. R. Bell ◽  
I. N. Olver ◽  
I. D. Davis ◽  
...  

BMC Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah L. Buckley ◽  
Fiona J. Collinson ◽  
Gemma Ainsworth ◽  
Heather Poad ◽  
Louise Flanagan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The combination of nivolumab, a programmed death-1 (PD-1) targeted monoclonal antibody, with the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) targeted antibody, ipilimumab, represents a new standard of care in the first-line setting for patients with intermediate- and poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) based on recent phase III data. Combining ipilimumab with nivolumab increases rates of grade 3 and 4 toxicity compared with nivolumab alone, and the optimal scheduling of these agents when used together remains unknown. The aim of the PRISM study is to assess whether less frequent dosing of ipilimumab (12-weekly versus 3-weekly), in combination with nivolumab, is associated with a favourable toxicity profile without adversely impacting efficacy. Methods The PRISM trial is a UK-based, open label, multi-centre, phase II, randomised controlled trial. The trial population consists of patients with untreated locally advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC, and aims to recruit 189 participants. Participants will be randomised on a 2:1 basis in favour of a modified schedule of 4 doses of 12-weekly ipilimumab versus a standard schedule of 4 doses of 3-weekly ipilimumab, both in combination with standard nivolumab. The proportion of participants experiencing a grade 3 or 4 adverse reaction within 12 months forms the primary endpoint of the study, but with 12-month progression free survival a key secondary endpoint. The incidence of all adverse events, discontinuation rates, overall response rate, duration of response, overall survival rates and health related quality of life will also be analysed as secondary endpoints. In addition, the potential of circulating and tissue-based biomarkers as predictors of therapy response will be explored. Discussion The combination of nivolumab with ipilimumab is active in patients with mRCC. Modifying the frequency of ipilimumab dosing may mitigate toxicity rates and positively impact quality of life without compromising efficacy, a hypothesis being explored in other tumour types such as non-small cell lung cancer. The best way to give this combination to patients with mRCC must be similarly established. Trial registration PRISM is registered with ISRCTN (reference ISRCTN95351638, 19/12/2017). Trial status At the time of submission, PRISM is open to recruitment and data collection is ongoing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document