Prognostic and Predictive Value of Hematologic Parameters in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Second Line Sunitinib Treatment Following IFN-alpha

PURPOSE We report the results of the Subcutaneous Administration Propeukin Program (SCAPP) II trial of an outpatient treatment in renal cell carcinoma using interleukin-2 (IL-2) and interferon alfa-2a (IFN-alpha) administered subcutaneously in combination with fluorouracil (5-FU). The objective of this multicenter trial was to confirm that the combination of IL-2, IFN-alpha, and 5-FU leads to a response rate greater than 20%. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma were included in this study. During the induction phase of the treatment, which lasted 10 weeks, IL-2 and IFN-alpha were administered subcutaneously three times a week for 8 weeks at doses of 18 MIU and 9 MIU, respectively. During these 8 weeks, every Monday, 5-FU was administered at a dose of 750 mg by intravenous infusion over 30 minutes. After evaluation, responding patients or patients with stable disease (SD) were given maintenance treatment, until disease progression (PD) or the appearance of unacceptable toxicity. Each maintenance cycle consisted of a 2-week treatment followed by a three-week rest period. During treatment, IL-2 and IFN-alpha were administered subcutaneously three times a week at doses of 18 MIU and 9 MIU, respectively. Every Monday, 5-FU was administered at a dose of 750 mg by intravenous infusion over 30 minutes. RESULTS This trial was closed when the sixth sequential analysis showed the lack of benefit from this combination. At the end of the induction period, of 62 patients, 12 (19%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10% to 31%) reached an objective response, including one complete response (CR), 16 presented with SD, and 27 showed PD. Twenty-seven patients (43%) developed severe toxicity that required reduction of the planned doses (13 patients), delayed treatment (eight patients), or treatment termination (six patients). Seventeen patients were given maintenance treatment. One- and 2-year survival rates were estimated at 55% and 33%, respectively. The 2-year survival rate was 15% in 11 patients who presented with three poor-prognosis factors and 41% in 51 patients who initially presented with no, one, or two poor-prognosis factors (P = .04). CONCLUSION As in other recently published studies that used 5-FU, IL-2, and IFN-alpha, the multicenter SCAPP II trial in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma generated severe toxicity. This sequential trial failed to confirm the favorable results previously obtained by Atzpodien and Sella with this combination of three drugs. Its efficacy, assessed on the response and survival rates, is near to the results observed in programs that used IL-2 alone given subcutaneously.

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2013.54.6911 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 32 (25) ◽

pp. 2765-2772 ◽

Cited By ~ 245

Author(s):

Robert J. Motzer ◽

Carlos H. Barrios ◽

Tae Min Kim ◽

Silvia Falcon ◽

Thomas Cosgriff ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Cell Carcinoma ◽

Phase Ii ◽

Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Renal Cell ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Primary Objective ◽

Second Line ◽

First Line ◽

First Line Therapy

Purpose A 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. Patients and Methods RECORD-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. Results Of 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). Conclusion Everolimus 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.

Download Full-text