scholarly journals The Role of Everolimus in Renal Cell Carcinoma

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-194
Author(s):  
Malek Meskawi ◽  
Roger Valdivieso ◽  
Paolo Dell’Oglio ◽  
Vincent Trudeau ◽  
Alessandro Larcher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Line Therapy

Everolimus (RAD001) is an orally administered agent that inhibits the mammalian target of rapamycin serine-threonine kinase. A phase III pivotal trial on everolimus, published in 2008, provided the first evidence for the efficacy of sequential therapy for patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In this study, everolimus was used after failure of one or several previous lines of therapy, and it demonstrated a 3-month survival benefit relative to placebo. Currently, based on the level 1 evidence, everolimus represents the molecule of choice for third-line therapy after failure of previous two tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). However, second-line use after failure of one TKI is challenged by two new molecules (nivolumab and cabozantinib), which proved to have better efficacy with similar toxicity profile. In non-clear cell metastatic RCC, the current evidence recommends everolimus as a second-line therapy after failure of previous first-line sunitinib.

scholarly journals Randomized Phase III Trial of Temsirolimus Versus Sorafenib As Second-Line Therapy After Sunitinib in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 760-767 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Hutson ◽  
Bernard Escudier ◽  
Emilio Esteban ◽  
Georg A. Bjarnason ◽  
Ho Yeong Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Line Therapy

Purpose This international phase III trial (Investigating Torisel As Second-Line Therapy [INTORSECT]) compared the efficacy of temsirolimus (mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor) and sorafenib (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor [VEGFR] tyrosine kinase inhibitor) as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) after disease progression on sunitinib. Patients and Methods In total, 512 patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive intravenous temsirolimus 25 mg once weekly (n = 259) or oral sorafenib 400 mg twice per day (n = 253), with stratification according to duration of prior sunitinib therapy (≤ or > 180 days), prognostic risk, histology (clear cell or non–clear cell), and nephrectomy status. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent review committee assessment. Safety, objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival (OS) were secondary end points. Results Primary analysis revealed no significant difference between treatment arms for PFS (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.07; two-sided P = .19) or ORR. Median PFS in the temsirolimus and sorafenib arms were 4.3 and 3.9 months, respectively. There was a significant OS difference in favor of sorafenib (stratified HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.63; two-sided P = .01). Median OS in the temsirolimus and sorafenib arms was 12.3 and 16.6 months, respectively. Safety profiles of both agents were consistent with previous studies. Conclusion In patients with mRCC and progression on sunitinib, second-line temsirolimus did not demonstrate a PFS advantage compared with sorafenib. The longer OS observed with sorafenib suggests sequenced VEGFR inhibition may benefit patients with mRCC.

scholarly journals The Molecular Characteristics of Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: What’s the Story Morning Glory?

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. 6237
Author(s):  
Andrea Marchetti ◽  
Matteo Rosellini ◽  
Veronica Mollica ◽  
Alessandro Rizzo ◽  
Elisa Tassinari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Treatment Algorithm ◽  
Morning Glory ◽  
Molecular Characteristics ◽  
Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Low Incidence

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are a miscellaneous group of tumors that include different histological subtypes, each one characterized by peculiarity in terms of genetic alteration, clinical behavior, prognosis, and treatment response. Because of their low incidence and poor enrollment in clinical trials, alongside their heterogeneity, additional efforts are required to better unveil the pathogenetic mechanisms and, consequently, to improve the treatment algorithm. Nowadays, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mTOR and MET inhibitors, and even cisplatin-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy are potential weapons that are still under evaluation in this setting. Various biomarkers have been evaluated for detecting progression and monitoring renal cell carcinoma, but more studies are necessary to improve this field. In this review, we provide an overview on the molecular characteristics of this group of tumors and the recently published trials, giving an insight into what might become the future therapeutic standard in this complex world of non-clear cell kidney cancers.

Sunitinib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy followed by sorefenib and sunitinib for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with clear cell histology: A multicenter randomized trial, CROSS-J-RCC.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 469-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Sei Naito ◽  
Naoto Sassa ◽  
Atsushi Takahashi ◽  
Tsunenori Kondo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Standard Dosage ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

469 Background: SWITCH, a prospective, randomized sequential trial to evaluate SU/SO versus SO/SU, revealed no difference in first-line or total PFS or OS, but no direct comparison was obtained between 1st line sunitinib (SU) and sorafenib (SO) for clear cell (CC) metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Methods: Treatment-naïve patients with CC mRCC, ECOG PS 0/1 and MSKCC favorable or intermediate risk were randomized to receive open-label SU/SO or SO/SU at the standard dosage and schedule. The primary endpoint was 1st line PFS, and secondary endpoints were total PFS and OS. The calculated sample size was 59 per group, with α = 0.05, β = 0.10, and a censoring rate of 15%. Results: Of 124 patients enrolled in this study from February 2010 to July 2012 from 39 institutions, 120 could be evaluated (SU/SO, 57 and SO/SU, 63). Baseline patients' characteristics in the SU/SO and SO/SU groups were as follows: favorable risk, 21% and 22%; and presence ofnephrectomy, 88% and 89%, respectively. First-line mPFS was 8.7 and 7.0 months in the SU/SO and SO/SU groups, respectively (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.42–1.08; p= 0.095). There was no statistically significant difference in total (T)-PFS, 27.8 M, and 22.6 m (HR 0.73, CI 0.428-1.246; p=0.247), or OS 38.4 m and 30.9 m (HR 0.934, CI 0.588-1.485; p=0.773). Subgroup analyses showed that T-PFS was NR and 27.8 m (p=0.021) in the favorable risk, and 38.4 m and 16.1 m (p=0.009) in with less than 5 metastatic sites, 6.5 m and 13.6 m (p=0.025) without nephrectomy in the SU/SO and SO/SU groups, respectively. The most common adverse events (AEs) in case of first-line SU or SO (all grade, all cause) were hand–foot syndrome (71% vs. 86%), hypothyroidism (70% vs. 33%), fatigue (57% vs. 40%), hypertension (55% vs. 44%), and diarrhea (23% vs. 38%). AEs were generally lower during second-line therapy. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in first-line PFS, T-PFS, and OS between the two sequential treatments. Although fewer patients received second-line treatment in the SU/SO group, OS in this group was numerically longer than that in the SO/SU group. Clinical trial information: 01481870.

Pembrolizumab monotherapy as first-line therapy in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (accRCC): Results from cohort A of KEYNOTE-427.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4500-4500 ◽  
Author(s):  
David F. McDermott ◽  
Jae-Lyun Lee ◽  
Cezary Szczylik ◽  
Frede Donskov ◽  
Jahangeer Malik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
First Line ◽  
Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document