Search

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy-based combinations have emerged as standard therapies for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, combined with epacadostat, an indoleamine 2,3-deoxygenase 1 selective inhibitor, demonstrated promising antitumor activity in a phase 1 study in advanced solid tumors, including mRCC. METHODS: KEYNOTE-679/ECHO-302 was a randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3 study (NCT03260894) that compared pembrolizumab plus epacadostat with sunitinib or pazopanib as first-line treatment for mRCC. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC and had not received systemic therapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks plus epacadostat 100 mg orally twice daily versus sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily (4 weeks on treatment followed by 2 weeks off treatment) or pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily. Original dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. Enrollment was stopped when a phase 3 study in melanoma of pembrolizumab plus epacadostat compared with pembrolizumab monotherapy did not meet its primary end point. This protocol was amended, and primary end point was changed to investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. RESULTS: One-hundred-twenty-nine patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab plus epacadostat (n = 64) or sunitinib/pazopanib (n = 65). Median (range) follow-up, defined as time from randomization to data cutoff, was 10.3 months (2.2-14.3) and 10.3 months (2.7-13.8) in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib arms, respectively. ORRs were similar between pembrolizumab plus epacadostat (31.3% [95% CI 20.2-44.1] and sunitinib/pazopanib (29.2% [18.6-41.8]). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34.4% and 42.9% of patients in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib arms, respectively. One patient in the sunitinib/pazopanib arm died of septic shock (not treatment-related). Circulating kynurenine levels decreased in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat arm, but not to levels observed in healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: ORRs were similar between pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib as first-line treatment in patients with mRCC. Safety and tolerability appeared similar between treatment arms; no new safety concerns were identified. Antitumor responses observed in patients with RCC receiving pembrolizumab plus epacadostat may be driven primarily by pembrolizumab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03260894 .

Background: Sunitinib, a newly developed multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has become a common therapeutic option for managing advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Examining the mechanism underlying the interaction between sunitinib and isavuconazole was the aim of this effort. Methods: The concentrations of sunitinib and its primary metabolite, N-desethyl sunitinib, were analyzed and quantified using ultra performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). Our study evaluated the potential interaction between isavuconazole and sunitinib using rat liver microsomes (RLM), human liver microsomes (HLM), and in vivo rat models. For the in vivo study, two groups (n = 5) of Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were randomly allocated to receive sunitinib either with or without co-administration of isavuconazole. Additionally, the effects of isavuconazole on the metabolic stability of sunitinib and N-desethyl sunitinib were studied in RLM in vitro. Results: Our findings demonstrated that in RLM, isavuconazole exhibited a mixed non-competitive and competitive inhibition mechanism, with an IC50 (half maximal inhibitory concentration) value of 1.33 µM. Meanwhile, in HLM, isavuconazole demonstrated a competitive inhibition mechanism, with an IC50 of 5.30 µM. In vivo studies showed that the presence of isavuconazole significantly increased the pharmacokinetic characteristics of sunitinib, with the AUC(0→t), AUC(0→∞), and Tmax rising to approximately 211.38%, 203.92%, and 288.89%, respectively, in contrast to the control group (5 mg/kg sunitinib alone). The pharmacokinetic characteristics of the metabolite N-desethyl sunitinib in the presence of isavuconazole remained largely unchanged compared to the control group. Furthermore, in vitro metabolic stability experiments revealed that isavuconazole inhibited the metabolic processing of both sunitinib and N-desethyl sunitinib. Conclusions: Isavuconazole had a major impact on sunitinib metabolism, providing fundamental information for the precise therapeutic administration of sunitinib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Sunitinib, a newly developed multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has become a common therapeutic option for managing advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Examining the mechanism underlying the interaction between sunitinib and isavuconazole was the aim of this effort. Methods The concentrations of sunitinib and its primary metabolite, N-desethyl sunitinib, were analyzed and quantified using ultra performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). Our study evaluated the potential interaction between isavuconazole and sunitinib using rat liver microsomes (RLM), human liver microsomes (HLM), and in vivo rat models. For the in vivo study, two groups (n = 5) of Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were randomly allocated to receive sunitinib either with or without co-administration of isavuconazole. Additionally, the effects of isavuconazole on the metabolic stability of sunitinib and N-desethyl sunitinib were studied in RLM in vitro. Results Our findings demonstrated that in RLM, isavuconazole exhibited a mixed non-competitive and competitive inhibition mechanism, with an IC50 (half maximal inhibitory concentration) value of 1.33 µM. Meanwhile, in HLM, isavuconazole demonstrated a competitive inhibition mechanism, with an IC50 of 5.30 µM. In vivo studies showed that the presence of isavuconazole significantly increased the pharmacokinetic characteristics of sunitinib, with the AUC(0→t), AUC(0→∞), and Tmax rising to approximately 211.38%, 203.92%, and 288.89%, respectively, in contrast to the control group (5 mg/kg sunitinib alone). The pharmacokinetic characteristics of the metabolite N-desethyl sunitinib in the presence of isavuconazole remained largely unchanged compared to the control group. Furthermore, in vitro metabolic stability experiments revealed that isavuconazole inhibited the metabolic processing of both sunitinib and N-desethyl sunitinib. Conclusions Isavuconazole had a major impact on sunitinib metabolism, providing fundamental information for the precise therapeutic administration of sunitinib.

Abstract Objective This study aimed to explore the effect of CD276 expression on the sunitinib sensitivity of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) cell and animal models and the potential mechanisms involved. Methods CD276 expression levels of ccRCC and normal samples were analyzed via online databases and real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). CD276 was knocked down in ccRCC cell models (sunitinib-resistant 786-O/R cells and sunitinib-sensitive 786-O cells) using shRNA transfection, and the cells were exposed to a sunitinib (2 µM) environment. Cells proliferation was then analyzed using MTT assay and colony formation experiment. Alkaline comet assay, immunofluorescent staining, and western blot experiments were conducted to assess the DNA damage repair ability of the cells. Western blot was also used to observe the activation of FAK-MAPK pathway within the cells. Finally, a nude mouse xenograft model was established and the nude mice were orally administered sunitinib (40 mg/kg/d) to evaluate the in vivo effects of CD276 knockdown on the therapeutic efficacy of sunitinib against ccRCC. Results CD276 was significantly upregulated in both ccRCC clinical tissue samples and cell models. In vitro experiments showed that knocking down CD276 reduced the survival rate, IC50 value, and colony-forming ability of ccRCC cells. Knocking down CD276 increased the comet tail moment (TM) values and γH2AX foci number, and reduced BRCA1 and RAD51 protein levels. Knocking down CD276 also decreased the levels of p-FAK, p-MEK, and p-ERK proteins. Conclusion Knocking down CD276 effectively improved the sensitivity of ccRCC cell and animal models to sunitinib treatment.

Objective: This study aimed to explore the effect of CD276 expression on the sunitinib sensitivity of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) cell and animal models and the potential mechanisms involved. Methods: CD276 expression levels of ccRCC and normal samples were analyzed via online databases and real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). CD276 was knocked down in ccRCC cell models (sunitinib-resistant 786-O/R cells and sunitinib-sensitive 786-O cells) using shRNA transfection, and the cells were exposed to a sunitinib (2 µM) environment. Cells proliferation was then analyzed using MTT assay and colony formation experiment. Alkaline comet assay, immunofluorescent staining, and western blot experiments were conducted to assess the DNA damage repair ability of the cells. Western blot was also used to observe the activation of FAK-MAPK pathway within the cells. Finally, a nude mouse xenograft model was established and the nude mice were orally administered sunitinib (40 mg/kg/d) to evaluate the in vivo effects of CD276 knockdown on the therapeutic efficacy of sunitinib against ccRCC. Results: CD276 was significantly upregulated in both ccRCC clinical tissue samples and cell models. In vitro experiments showed that knocking down CD276 reduced the survival rate, IC50 value, and colony-forming ability of ccRCC cells. Knocking down CD276 increased the comet tail moment (TM) values and γH2AX foci number, and reduced BRCA1 and RAD51 protein levels. Knocking down CD276 also decreased the levels of p-FAK, p-MEK, and p-ERK proteins. Conclusion: Knocking down CD276 effectively improved the sensitivity of ccRCC cell and animal models to sunitinib treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Targeted drugs are the main methods of RCC treatment. However, drug resistance is common in RCC patients, in-depth study of the drug-resistant mechanism is essential. Methods: We constructed sunitinib resistant and Twist overexpressed A498 cells, and studied its mechanisms in vitro and in vivo. Results: In cell research, we found that either sunitinib resistance or Twist overexpression can activate Wnt/β-catenin and EMT signaling pathway, and the sunitinib resistance may work through β-catenin/TWIST/TCF4 trimer. In zebrafish research, we confirmed the similarity of Twist overexpression and sunitinib resistance, and the promoting effect of Twist overexpression on drug resistance. Conclusions: Sunitinib resistance and Twist overexpression can activate Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway and EMT to promote the growth and metastasis of RCC cells. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The authors intend to compare the effects of each targeted therapy (TT) in the treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using big data based on the Korean National Health Insurance System (NHIS) and determine the optimal treatment sequence. Methods Data on the medical use of patients with kidney cancer were obtained from the NHIS database from January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2020. Patient variables included age, sex, income level, place of residence, prescribing department, and duration from diagnosis to the prescription date. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) for each drug and sequencing. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) according to age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index based on the primary TTs. Results After 1:1 PSM, the sunitinib (SUN) (n = 1,214) and pazopanib (PAZ) (n = 1,214) groups showed a well-matched distribution across the entire cohort. In the primary treatment group, PAZ had lower OS than SUN (HR, 1.167; p = 0.0015). In the secondary treatment group, axitinib (AXI) had more favorable OS than cabozantinib (CAB) (HR, 0.735; p = 0.0118), and everolimus had more adverse outcomes than CAB (HR, 1.544; p

Abstract Background Since renal cell carcinoma(RCC) is insensitive to conventional chemoradiotherapy, molecularly targeted drugs are commonly used treatments for unresectable advanced RCC. The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of TACE + sunitinib vs. sunitinib in the treatment of unresectable advanced RCC. Methods This study included 98 patients with unresectable advanced RCC who were treated in Union Hospital from January 2015 to December 2018, and they met the criteria. They were divided into two groups: TACE + Sunitinib group (N = 47) and Sunitinib group (N = 51). We conducted a retrospective study to analyze the efficacy and safety of the two groups of patients. Results (1)TACE + Sunitinib group: 4 patients (8.5%) achieved CR, 27 patients (57.5%) achieved PR, 9 patients (19.1%) achieved SD, and 7 patients (14.9%) achieved PD. Sunitinib group, 0 patients (0%) achieved CR, 20 patients (39.2%) achieved PR, 14 patients (27.5%) achieved SD, and 17 patients (33.3%) achieved PD. (P = 0.017) (2)ORR: TACE + sunitinib group, 66.0%; sunitinib group, 39.2%. (P = 0.009) (3)DCR: TACE + sunitinib group, 85.1%; sunitinib group, 66.7%. (P = 0.038) (4) In the TACE + sunitinib group, mPFS was 15.6 months, mOS was 35.0 months; in the sunitinib group, the mPFS was 10.9 months, mOS was 25.7 months. (P

Abstract Background The association between the combination of platelet count and neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (COP-NLR) at the time of adverse events during sunitinib treatment and prognosis is unclear, and prognostic models combining the prognostic factors of sunitinib have not been well studied. Thus, we developed a prognostic model that includes the COP-NLR to predict the prognosis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with sunitinib. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of 102 patients treated with sunitinib for mRCC between 2008 and 2020 in three hospitals associated with Showa University, Japan. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). The collected data included baseline patient characteristics, adverse events, laboratory values, and COP-NLR scores within the first 6 weeks of sunitinib treatment. Prognostic factors of OS were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. The integer score was derived from the beta-coefficient (β) of these factors and was divided into three groups. The survival curves were visualized using the Kaplan–Meier method and estimated using a log-rank test. Results The median OS was 32.3 months. Multivariable analysis showed that the number of metastatic sites, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group, number of metastases, non-hypertension, modified Glasgow Prognostic Score, and 6-week COP-NLR were significantly associated with OS. A higher 6-week COP-NLR was significantly associated with a shorter OS (p

Background: The authors intend to compare the effects of each targeted therapy (TT) in the treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using big data based on the Korean National Health Insurance System (NHIS) and determine the optimal treatment sequence. Methods: Data on the medical use of patients with kidney cancer were obtained from the NHIS database from January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2020. Patient variables included age, sex, income level, place of residence, prescribing department, and duration from diagnosis to the prescription date. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) for each drug and sequencing. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) according to age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index based on the primary TTs. Results: After 1:1 PSM, the sunitinib (SUN) (n = 1,214) and pazopanib (PAZ) (n = 1,214) groups showed a well-matched distribution across the entire cohort. In the primary treatment group, PAZ had lower OS than SUN (HR, 1.167; p = 0.0015). In the secondary treatment group, axitinib (AXI) had more favorable OS than cabozantinib (CAB) (HR, 0.735; p = 0.0118), and everolimus had more adverse outcomes than CAB (HR, 1.544; p < 0.0001). In the first to second TT sequencing, SUN–AXI had the highest OS; however, there was no statistically significant difference when compared with PAZ–AXI, which was the second highest (HR, 0.876; p = 0.3312). The 5-year survival rate was calculated in the following order: SUN–AXI (51.44%), PAZ–AXI (47.12%), SUN–CAB (43.59%), and PAZ–CAB (34.28%). When the four sequencing methods were compared, only SUN–AXI versus PAZ–CAB (p = 0.003) and PAZ–AXI versus PAZ–CAB (p = 0.017) were statistically significant. Conclusions: In a population-based RWD analysis of Korean patients with mRCC, SUN-AXI sequencing was shown to be the most effective among the first to second TT sequencing methods in treatment, with a relative survival advantage over other sequencing combinations. To further support the results of this study, risk-stratified analysis is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since renal cell carcinoma(RCC) is insensitive to conventional chemoradiotherapy, molecularly targeted drugs are commonly used treatments for unresectable advanced RCC. The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of TACE + sunitinib vs. sunitinib in the treatment of unresectable advanced RCC. Methods: This study included 98 patients with unresectable advanced RCC who were treated in Union Hospital from January 2015 to December 2018, and they met the criteria. They were divided into two groups: TACE + Sunitinib group (N = 47) and Sunitinib group (N = 51). We conducted a retrospective study to analyze the efficacy and safety of the two groups of patients. Results: (1)TACE + Sunitinib group: 4 patients (8.5%) achieved CR, 27 patients (57.5%) achieved PR, 9 patients (19.1%) achieved SD, and 7 patients (14.9%) achieved PD. Sunitinib group, 0 patients (0%) achieved CR, 20 patients (39.2%) achieved PR, 14 patients (27.5%) achieved SD, and 17 patients (33.3%) achieved PD. (P = 0.017) (2)ORR: TACE + sunitinib group, 66.0%; sunitinib group, 39.2%. (P = 0.009) (3)DCR: TACE + sunitinib group, 85.1%; sunitinib group, 66.7%. (P = 0.038) (4) In the TACE + sunitinib group, mPFS was 15.6 months, mOS was 35.0 months; in the sunitinib group, the mPFS was 10.9 months, mOS was 25.7 months. (P < 0.001) (5) The incidence of abdominal pain, fever, and vomiting was higher in the TACE + sunitinib group than in the sunitinib group (abdominal pain: 55.3% vs. 13.7%; fever: 61.7% vs. 7.8%; vomiting: 40.4% vs. 19.6%; P < 0.05). The technical success rate of TACE in TACE + Sunitinib group is 100%. Conclusions: The TACE + sunitinib group had higher ORR and DCR, longer OS and PFS than the sunitinib alone group. TACE combined with sunitinib can play a complementary role and is a safe and effective treatment for advanced RCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as sunitinib, are used for cancer treatment, but may also affect platelet count and function with possible hemostatic consequences. Here, we investigated whether patient treatment with the TKI sunitinib affected quantitative and qualitative platelet traits as a function of the sunitinib level and the occurrence of bleeding. Methods Blood was collected from 20 metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients before treatment, and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks and 3 months after sunitinib administration. We measured blood cell counts, platelet aggregation, and concentrations of sunitinib as well as its N-desethyl metabolite in plasma, serum and isolated platelets. Progression of disease (PD) and bleeding were monitored after 3 months. Results In sunitinib-treated mRCC patients, concentrations of (N-desethyl-)sunitinib in plasma and serum were highly correlated. In the patients’ platelets the active metabolite levels were relatively increased as compared to sunitinib. On average, a sustained reduction in platelet count was observed on-treatment, which was significantly related to the inhibitor levels in plasma/serum. Principal component and correlational analysis showed that the (N-desethyl-)sunitinib levels in plasma/serum were linked to a reduction in both platelet count and collagen-induced platelet aggregation. The reduced aggregation associated in part with reported bleeding, but did not correlate to PD. Conclusion The sunitinib-induced reduction in quantitative and qualitative platelet traits may reflect the effective sunitinib levels in the patient. These novel results may serve as a proof-of-principle for other TKI-related drugs, where both platelet count and functions are affected, which could be used for therapeutic drug monitoring.

Background: Acquired resistance to approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors limits their clinical use in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). This study investigated the safety, tolerability and efficacy of alpelisib, a phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor, used in combination with imatinib in patients with advanced GIST who had failed prior therapy with both imatinib and sunitinib.Methods: This phase 1b, multicenter, open-label study consisted of 2 phases: dose escalation and dose expansion. Dose escalation involved 200 mg once daily (QD) alpelisib, initially, followed by 250 and 350 mg. These were combined with 400 mg QD imatinib until maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of alpelisib in combination with imatinib was determined. This MTD/RP2D dose was tested to evaluate the clinical activity of this combination in dose expansion.Results: Fifty-six patients were enrolled, 21 and 35 in the dose escalation and expansion phases, respectively. The MTD of alpelisib given with imatinib was determined as 350 mg QD. Combination treatment showed partial response in 1 (2.9%) and stable disease in 15 (42.9%) patients. Median progression-free survival was 2 months (95% CI 1.8-4.6). Overall, 92.9% patients had adverse events (AEs) while 46.4% had grade 3/4 AEs, hyperglycemia being the most common (23.2%).Conclusions: The MTD of alpelisib was estimated as 350 mg QD when used in combination with imatinib 400 mg QD after oral administration in patients with advanced GIST. The safety and tolerability profile of this combination was acceptable; however, the combination did not demonstrate sufficient clinical activity to justify additional clinical testing.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01735968 (date of initial registration 28/11/2012). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Acquired resistance to approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors limits their clinical use in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). This study investigated the safety, tolerability and efficacy of alpelisib, a phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor, used in combination with imatinib in patients with advanced GIST who had failed prior therapy with both imatinib and sunitinib. Methods This phase 1b, multicenter, open-label study consisted of 2 phases: dose escalation and dose expansion. Dose escalation involved 200 mg once daily (QD) alpelisib, initially, followed by 250 and 350 mg. These were combined with 400 mg QD imatinib until maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of alpelisib in combination with imatinib was determined. This MTD/RP2D dose was tested to evaluate the clinical activity of this combination in dose expansion. Results Fifty-six patients were enrolled, 21 and 35 in the dose escalation and expansion phases, respectively. The MTD of alpelisib given with imatinib was determined as 350 mg QD. Combination treatment showed partial response in 1 (2.9%) and stable disease in 15 (42.9%) patients. Median progression-free survival was 2 months (95% CI 1.8–4.6). Overall, 92.9% patients had adverse events (AEs) while 46.4% had grade 3/4 AEs, hyperglycemia being the most common (23.2%). Conclusions The MTD of alpelisib was estimated as 350 mg QD when used in combination with imatinib 400 mg QD after oral administration in patients with advanced GIST. The safety and tolerability profile of this combination was acceptable; however, the combination did not demonstrate sufficient clinical activity to justify additional clinical testing. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01735968 (date of initial registration 28/11/2012).

Background: The association between the combination of platelet count and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (COP-NLR) at the time of adverse events during sunitinib treatment and prognosis is unclear, and prognostic models combining the prognostic factors of sunitinib have not been well studied. Thus, we developed a prognostic model that includes the COP-NLR to predict the prognosis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with sunitinib.Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 102 patients treated with sunitinib for mRCC between 2008 and 2020 in three hospitals associated with Showa University, Japan. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). The collected data included baseline patient characteristics, adverse events, laboratory values, and COP-NLR scores within the first 6 weeks of sunitinib treatment. Prognostic factors of OS were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. The integer score was derived from the beta-coefficient (β) of these factors and was divided into three groups. The survival curves were visualized using the Kaplan-Meier method and estimated using a log-rank test.Results: The median OS was 32.3 months. Multivariable analysis showed that the number of metastatic sites, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group, number of metastases, non-hypertension, modified Glasgow Prognostic Score, and 6-week COP-NLR were significantly associated with OS. A higher 6-week COP-NLR was significantly associated with a shorter OS (p < 0.001). The β values of the five factors for OS were scored (non-hypertension, mGPS, and 6-week COP-NLR = 1 point; number of metastatic sites = 2 points; MSKCC risk group = 3 points) and patients divided into three groups (≤ 1, 2-3, and ≥ 4). The low-risk (≤ 1) group had significantly longer OS than the high-risk (≥ 4) group (median OS: 99.0 vs. 6.2 months, p < 0.001).Conclusions: This study showed that the COP-NLR within the first 6 weeks of sunitinib treatment had a greater impact on OS than the COP-NLR at the start of sunitinib treatment. The developed prognostic model for OS, including the 6-week COP-NLR, will be useful in decision-making to continue sunitinib in the early treatment stage of patients with mRCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Cell lines are often used to assess the resistance of anticancer drugs when in vivo analysis is not possible. However, the process for establishing anti-cancer drug resistance in cell cultures in vitro and the subsequent method of then evaluating resistance are not clearly established. Traditionally, the IC50 is the most commonly used indicator of resistance evaluation but it cannot represent the effectiveness of anti-cancer drugs in a clinical setting and lacks reliability because it is heavily affected by the cell doubling time. Hence, new indicators that can evaluate anti-cancer drug resistance are needed. Methods A novel resistance evaluation methodology was validated in this present study by establishing sunitinib resistance in renal cell carcinoma cells and assessing the cross-resistance of five different anti-cancer drugs. Results It was confirmed in this present study that the IC50 does not reflect the cell proliferation rates in a way that represents anti-cancer drug resistance. An alternative indicator that can also be clinically meaningful when using in vitro cell line systems is GI100. Additionally, the GR100 allows different cell populations to be calibrated on the same basis when multiple experimental results are compared. Conclusion Since the GR100 has properties that indicate the efficiency of anti-cancer drugs, both the efficacy and GR100 of a particular anti-cancer drug can be used to effectively assess the resistance.

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as sunitinib, are used for cancer treatment, but may also affect platelet count and function with possible hemostatic consequences. Here, we investigated whether patient treatment with the TKI sunitinib affected quantitative and qualitative platelet traits as a function of the sunitinib level and the occurrence of bleeding.Methods: Blood was collected from 20 metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients before treatment, and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks and 3 months after sunitinib administration. We measured blood cell counts, platelet aggregation, and concentrations of sunitinib as well as its N-desethyl metabolite in plasma, serum and isolated platelets. Progression of disease (PD) and bleeding were monitored after 3 months.Results: In sunitinib-treated mRCC patients, concentrations of (N-desethyl-)sunitinib in plasma and serum were highly correlated. In the patients' platelets the active metabolite levels were relatively increased as compared to sunitinib. On average, a sustained reduction in platelet count was observed on-treatment, which was significantly related to the inhibitor levels in plasma/serum. Principal component and correlational analysis showed that the (N-desethyl-)sunitinib levels in plasma/serum were linked to a reduction in both platelet count and collagen-induced platelet aggregation. The reduced aggregation associated in part with reported bleeding, but did not correlate to PD.Conclusion: The sunitinib-induced reduction in quantitative and qualitative platelet traits may reflect the effective sunitinib levels in the patient. These novel results may serve as a proof-of-principle for other TKI-related drugs, where both platelet count and functions are affected, which could be used for therapeutic drug monitoring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Sequential inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway with sorafenib could be useful for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Our aim was to determine the activity and tolerability of sorafenib as a second-line therapy in advanced RCC initially treated with a different VEGF-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Methods A prospective observational cohort in Mexico (2012–2019). We included 132 subjects with metastatic RCC and who had progression despite treatment with sunitinib. The primary end-point was time to disease progression as evaluated every 12–16 weeks. Results The mean age of the cohort was 59 years (interquartile range [IQR] 50–72), 96 (73%) were men, and 48 (36%) had a favorable prognosis according to the IMDC (International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium) prognostic model. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival after the introduction of sorafenib treatment was 8.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7–10.5) and 40 months (95% CI: 34.5–45.4) respectively. The median overall survival from RCC diagnosis to death was 71 months (95% CI: 58.2–83.8). On multivariable analyses, age > 65 years was associated with a longer PFS (HR 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31–0.86; p = 0.018). The median PFS in subjects aged > 65 years was longer compared to subjects ≤65 years (14.0 [95% CI: 9.2–18.8] vs. 7.2 months [95% CI: 5.3–9.1]; p = 0.012). Adverse events grade ≥ 3 associated with sorafenib occurred in 38 (29%) patients. Conclusion Sequential inhibition of VEGF with sorafenib as a second-line treatment may benefit patients with metastatic RCC, especially in subjects > 65 years old.

Abstract Background We performed a pooled analysis of the COMPARZ study assessing efficacy and safety of pazopanib versus sunitinib in treatment-naïve Chinese patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (a/mRCC). Methods In the COMPARZ study, patients were randomized (1:1) to receive pazopanib 800 mg once daily (QD) continuously or sunitinib 50 mg QD in 6-week cycles (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety. PFS and ORR were assessed by independent review committee (IRC) and local investigators. Results Of the 209 Chinese patients (pazopanib, [n = 109] and sunitinib, [n = 100]), 155 (74%) were males and median age was 57 years (range, 18–79). Median PFS was 13.9 months for pazopanib versus 14.3 months for sunitinib per investigator assessment and 8.3 months in both arms per IRC assessment; PFS hazard ratio was 1.17 (investigator) and 0.99 (IRC). Median OS was not reached in pazopanib arm and was 29.5 months in sunitinib arm. ORR was significantly higher in pazopanib arm versus sunitinib arm (investigator: 41% versus 23% [P = 0.0052]; IRC: 35% versus 20% [P = 0.0203]). Pazopanib was generally well tolerated in Chinese patients with a/mRCC. Most frequent AEs in the pazopanib arm were diarrhea and hair color changes whereas the most frequent AEs in the sunitinib arm were decreased platelets, decreased neutrophil count, and thrombocytopenia. Conclusion The results of the pooled analysis were consistent with the overall population in the COMPARZ study, and confirmed similar PFS and OS of pazopanib and sunitinib in the Chinese patients. Trial registration clinical trials.gov, NCT00720941 (August 14, 2008) and NCT01147822 (May 19, 2010).

Background: Cell lines are often used to assess the resistance of anticancer drugs when in vivo analysis is not possible. However, the process for establishing anti-cancer drug resistance in cell cultures in vitro and the subsequent method of then evaluating resistance are not clearly established. Traditionally, the IC50 is the most commonly used indicator of resistance evaluation but it cannot represent the effectiveness of anti-cancer drugs in a clinical setting and lacks reliability because it is heavily affected by the cell doubling time. Hence, new indicators that can evaluate anti-cancer drug resistance are needed.Methods: A novel resistance evaluation methodology was validated in this present study by establishing sunitinib resistance in renal cell carcinoma cells and assessing the cross-resistance of five different anti-cancer drugs.Results: It was confirmed in this present study that the IC50 does not reflect the cell proliferation rates in a way that represents anti-cancer drug resistance. An alternative indicator that can also be clinically meaningful when using in vitro cell line systems is GI100. Additionally, the GR100 allows different cell populations to be calibrated on the same basis when multiple experimental results are compared.Conclusion: Since the GR100 has properties that indicate the efficiency of anti-cancer drugs, both the efficacy and GR100 of a particular anti-cancer drug can be used to effectively assess the resistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Sunitinib and pazopanib are extensively used as first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We performed this meta-analysis to assess the anti-tumor effectiveness, toxicity, and total costs of the two drugs among patients with mRCC/advanced RCC (aRCC). Materials and Methods: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched to obtain eligible articles. The endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse effects (AEs), and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs. Results We included 14 medium- to high-quality studies. Both drugs were valid for mRCC/aRCC, with equivalent PFS (hazard ratio (HR) =1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98–1.15, P = 0.13), OS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.79–1.07, P = 0.29), objective response rate (ORR, risk ratio (RR) =1.03, 95% CI: 0.93–1.13, p = 0.58), and disease control rate (DCR, RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.94–1.22, P = 0.54). Sunitinib had more dosage reductions and higher PPPM (weighted mean difference = − 1.50 thousand US dollars, 95% CI: − 2.27 to − 0.72, P = 0.0002). Furthermore, more incidences of severe fatigue, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were recorded for sunitinib, but pazopanib had more liver toxicity. In subgroup analysis, studies from the US reported longer OS (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77–0.95, P = 0.004) and higher ORR (RR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.03–1.51, P = 0.03). Conclusions Pazopanib provides equivalent anti-tumor effectiveness and lower PPPM as compared with sunitinib for mRCC/aRCC. Great care should be given to pazopanib-treated patients with abnormal liver function. Nevertheless, more large-scale, high-quality studies are required.

Abstract Background Sunitinib plays an important role in managing the metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Sunitinib-induced hypothyroidism is a common side-effect of the drug. There have been attempts to link hypothyroidism with a better clinical outcome in sunitinib-treated (mRCC) patients. Our aim was to relate the impact of hypothyroidism to the survival of these patients. Methods We have evaluated 70 patients with mRCC that received sunitinib as a first line treatment. Thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) was measured at baseline, after 15 days of treatment (day-15) and at the end of the second cycle (day-75). Biomarker data and correlations with response were analysed with Microsoft Excel. Comparison results from Student’s t-test with a p less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Kaplan-Meyer and log-rank tests were performed using GraphPad Prism 5 for Windows. Results Regarding the response to treatment, a progression-free survival (PFS) of 9.47 months and an overall survival (OS) of 22.03 months were demonstrated. Our data are consistent with published data by other authors. On day-15 from the beginning of the treatment an important number of patients exhibited a TSH elevation. On day-15 42.86% had a TSH over the upper normal limit and 50.0% at the end of the second cycle (day-75). TSH increased earlier in patients that exhibited an objective response (× 3.33 times the baseline values on day-15) than patients that exhibited disease stabilisation (× 2.18) or disease progression (× 1.59). Early increases in TSH were associated with a longer PFS (11.92 vs. 8.82 months, p = 0.0476) and a longer OS (3.10 vs. 1.08 years, p = 0.0011). Conclusions Early TSH-increase is associated with a clinical benefit. The patients that showed at least a twofold increase of their baseline TSH, responded to therapy by stabilisation or by regression of disease. This is the only study to our knowledge which shows that early increases - 2 weeks from starting the treatment - in TSH levels have a prognostic value. Both PFS and OS of the patients who demonstrated a higher than a twofold rise were significantly longer than the PFS and the OS of the patients that presented a lower or no TSH-increase.

Background: Sequential inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway with sorafenib could be useful for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Our aim was to determine the activity and tolerability of sorafenib as a second-line therapy in advanced RCC initially treated with a different VEGF-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI).Methods: A prospective observational cohort in Mexico (2012-2019). We included 132 subjects with metastatic RCC and who had progression despite treatment with sunitinib. The primary end-point was time to disease progression as evaluated every 12-16 weeks.Results: The mean age of the cohort was 59 years (interquartile range [IQR] 50-72), 96 (73%) were men, and 48 (36%) had a favorable prognosis according to the IMDC (International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium) prognostic model. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival after the introduction of sorafenib treatment was 8.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7-10.5) and 40 months (95% CI: 34.5-45.4) respectively. The median overall survival from RCC diagnosis to death was 71 months (95% CI: 58.2-83.8). On multivariable analyses, age > 65 years was associated with a longer PFS (HR 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31-0.86; p = 0.018). The median PFS in subjects aged > 65 years was longer compared to subjects ≤65 years (14.0 [95% CI: 9.2-18.8] vs. 7.2 months [95% CI: 5.3-9.1]; p = 0.012). Adverse events grade ≥ 3 associated with sorafenib occurred in 38 (29%) patients.Conclusion: Sequential inhibition of VEGF with sorafenib as a second-line treatment may benefit patients with metastatic RCC, especially in subjects > 65 years old. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In patients with metastatic renal cell cancer, based on limited evidence, increased sunitinib exposure is associated with better outcome. The survival and toxicity data of patients receiving individualized dose escalated sunitinib therapy as compared to standard management were analyzed in this study. Methods From July 2013, the data of metastatic renal cell cancer patients with slight progression but still a stable disease according to RECIST 1.1 criteria treated with an escalated dose of sunitinib (first level: 62.5 mg/day in 4/2 or 2 × 2/1 scheme, second level: 75 mg/day in 4/2 or 2 × 2/1 scheme) were collected prospectively. Regarding characteristics, outcome, and toxicity data, an explorative retrospective analysis of the register was carried out, comparing treatments after and before July 1, 2013 in the study (selected patients for escalated dose) and control (standard dose) groups, respectively. Results The study involved 103 patients receiving sunitinib therapy with a median overall and progression free survival of 25.36 ± 2.62 and 14.2 ± 3.22 months, respectively. Slight progression was detected in 48.5% of them. First and second-level dose escalation were indicated in 18.2% and 4.1% of patients, respectively. The dosing scheme was modified in 22.2%. The median progression free survival (39.7 ± 5.1 vs 14.2 ± 1.3 months (p = 0.037)) and the overall survival (57.5 ± 10.7 vs 27.9 ± 2.5 months (p = 0.044)) were significantly better in the study group (with dose escalation) than in the control group. Patients with nephrectomy and lower Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) scores showed more favorable outcomes. After dose escalation, the most common adverse events were worsening or development of fatigue, hypertension, stomatitis, and weight loss of over 10%. Conclusions Escalation of sunitinib dosing in selected patients with metastatic renal cell cancer, especially in case of slight progression, based on tolerable toxicity is safe and improves outcome. Dose escalation in 12.5 mg steps may be recommended for properly educated patients.

Background: We performed a pooled analysis of the COMPARZ study assessing efficacy and safety of pazopanib versus sunitinib in treatment-naïve Chinese patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (a/mRCC).Methods: In the COMPARZ study, patients were randomized (1:1) to receive pazopanib 800 mg once daily (QD) continuously or sunitinib 50 mg QD in 6-week cycles (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety. PFS and ORR were assessed by independent review committee (IRC) and local investigators.Results: Of the 209 Chinese patients (pazopanib, [n = 109] and sunitinib, [n = 100]), 155 (74%) were males and median age was 57 years (range, 18-79). Median PFS was 13.9 months for pazopanib versus 14.3 months for sunitinib per investigator assessment and 8.3 months in both arms per IRC assessment; PFS hazard ratio was 1.17 (investigator) and 0.99 (IRC). Median OS was not reached in pazopanib arm and was 29.5 months in sunitinib arm. ORR was significantly higher in pazopanib arm versus sunitinib arm (investigator: 41% versus 23% [P = 0.0052]; IRC: 35% versus 20% [P = 0.0203]). Pazopanib was generally well tolerated in Chinese patients with a/mRCC. Most frequent AEs in the pazopanib arm were diarrhea and hair color changes whereas the most frequent AEs in the sunitinib arm were decreased platelets, decreased neutrophil count, and thrombocytopenia.Conclusion: The results of the pooled analysis were consistent with the overall population in the COMPARZ study, and confirmed similar PFS and OS of pazopanib and sunitinib in the Chinese patients.Trial Registration: clinical trials.gov, NCT00720941 (August 14, 2008) and NCT01147822 (May 19, 2010). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) initiation and evolution is commonly framed by KIT/PDGFRA oncogenic activation, and in later stages by the polyclonal expansion of resistant subpopulations harboring KIT secondary mutations after the onset of imatinib resistance. Thus, circulating tumor (ct)DNA determination is expected to be an informative non-invasive dynamic biomarker in GIST patients.Methods: We performed amplicon-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) across 60 clinically relevant genes in 37 plasma samples from 18 GIST patients collected prospectively. ctDNA alterations were compared with NGS of matched tumor tissue samples (obtained either simultaneously or at the time of diagnosis) and cross-validated with droplet digital PCR (ddPCR).Results: We were able to identify cfDNA mutations in five out of 18 patients had detectable in at least one timepoint. Overall, NGS sensitivity for detection of cell-free (cf)DNA mutations in plasma was 28.6%, showing high concordance with ddPCR confirmation. We found that GIST had relatively low ctDNA shedding, and mutations were at low allele frequencies. ctDNA was detected only in GIST patients with advanced disease after imatinib failure, predicting tumor dynamics in serial monitoring. KIT secondary mutations were the only mechanism of resistance found across 10 imatinib-resistant GIST patients progressing to sunitinib or regorafenib.Conclusions: ctDNA evaluation with amplicon-based NGS detects KIT primary and secondary mutations in metastatic GIST patients, particularly after imatinib progression. GIST exhibits low ctDNA shedding, but ctDNA monitoring, when positive, reflects tumor dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background It is well known that patient characteristics and survival outcomes in randomized trials may not necessarily be similar to those in real-life clinical practice. The aim of the present study was to analyse second line treatment strategies in the real-world practice and to estimate the outcomes of patients treated with second-line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Methods This is a retrospective, registry-based study using data from the national registry of targeted therapies for mRCC. The RENIS registry contains data on 3049 patients who started the therapy with at least one targeted agent before 31 December, 2014. Of these patients, 1029 had a record of at least two different targeted therapies and sufficient data for analysis. Survival analysis was carried out using the Kaplan-Meier method. Statistical significance of differences in survival between subgroups was assessed using the log-rank test. Results The median overall survival from the start of second-line treatment was 17.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.5–19.5 months), 17.1 months (95% CI 14.5–19.8), and 15.4 months (95% CI 11.0–19.7) for second-line everolimus, sorafenib, and sunitinib, respectively. Patients receiving second-line everolimus were older at the start of second-line treatment, more likely to have metachronous disease, and less likely to be previously treated with cytokines or to continue to third-line treatment than patients treated with second-line sunitinib or sorafenib. Progression-free survival (PFS) correlated with PFS on first-line treatment only for everolimus. Conclusions In this retrospective study, no significant differences in survival were observed between the cohorts treated with different second-line agents including everolimus, sorafenib, and sunitinib.

Abstract Background Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) are rarely encountered mesenchymal tumours of the gastrointestinal tract (1.5 people per 100,000/year) that are even more rarely seen in paediatric patients (1–2% of all cases). The standard treatment for advanced adult GIST is imatinib with sunitinib as a second-line option. Although the efficacy and tolerability of sunitinib in adults with GIST has been established, little is known of the profile of sunitinib in paediatric/young adult patients with GIST given the rarity of this disease. Methods Paediatric/young adult patients aged up to 21 years with diagnosis of GIST who were treated with sunitinib were identified from retrospective records from three centres in Europe and the US. Most patients commenced sunitinib in a 6-week cycle, however, dosing could be reduced, delayed, changed to (or initiated with) a continuous schedule. Objective response (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours [RECIST]) and adverse events were recorded. Results We identified 9 paediatric/young adult patients (aged 11–21 years) with GIST who were treated with sunitinib de novo (n = 1) or following failure of imatinib (n = 8). Progressive disease was previously documented for all patients including 7 patients during imatinib therapy. Baseline patient and tumour profile characteristics showed a distinct profile (notably all were wild-type KIT/PDGFR) compared to that established for adults. Sunitinib treatment was associated with a best response of stable disease for 7 patients, with disease stabilisation lasting from 1 month to >73 months and a median progression free survival time of 15 months. There was some evidence of better disease control for sunitinib when compared to prior imatinib. Most adverse events with sunitinib were manageable and all were consistent with the known profile of the agent. Conclusion The ability to draw firm conclusions from this case series is limited by the small number of patients and the use of retrospective data which is largely reflective of the rarity of this condition. However, our findings provide initial evidence of clinical benefit and a generally manageable toxicity profile for sunitinib when administered to paediatric/young adult patients with GIST, most of whom had documented progressive disease during prior imatinib treatment.

Abstract Background Pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis (PCI) is a rare self-limiting condition characterized by air-filled cysts within intestinal walls. Diagnosis should be prudent because it can mimic pneumoperitoneum leading to unnecessary treatment such as surgical exploration. Although various drugs including anti-neoplastic agents have been suggested as etiologies, cases related to sunitinib are sparse. Because of the rarity of this unusual side effect by sunitinib, we report the case report. Case presentation A 68-year-old female with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor who was treated with sunitinb for 4 months visited to our hospital complaining of severe diarrhea and mild abdominal discomfort. The abdominal X-ray showed subdiaphragmatic air mimicking intestinal perforation. After the meticulous evaluation including abdomino-pelvic computed tomography, the patient was diagnosed of PCI induced by sunitinib and fully recovered with conservative management. Conclusions It is important to note that PCI can develop after treatment with sunitinib because PCI has not been widely known as an adverse event caused by the agent. Furthemore, emergent surgery while sunitinib was administrated without adequate washout period can result in substantial surgical complications which could be avoided with the precise diagnosis.

Abstract Background Studies comparing the effect of antiangiogenic agents targeting different angiogenic pathways are sparse. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of properdistatin and sunitinib treatment in a preclinical model of malignant melanoma. Properdistatin is a small peptide derived from the thrombospondin-1 domain of the plasma protein properdin, and sunitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting several receptors including the vascular endothelial growth factor receptors. Methods R-18 human melanoma xenografts growing in dorsal window chambers were treated with properdistatin, sunitinib, or vehicle. Parameters describing the morphology of tumor vasculature were assessed from high-resolution transillumination images, and BST (blood supply time; the time needed for arterial blood to flow from the main supplying artery to downstream microvessels) was assessed from first-pass imaging movies recorded after a bolus of fluorescence-labeled dextran had been administered intravenously. Tumor hypoxia was assessed from immunohistochemical preparations of the imaged tissue by using pimonidazole as a hypoxia marker. Results Properdistatin treatment selectively removed small-diameter vessels and reduced BST, whereas sunitinib treatment reduced the density of small- and large-diameter vessel similarly and did not change BST. These observations imply that properdistatin treatment reduced geometric resistance to blood flow and improved vascular function, whereas sunitinib treatment did not affect vascular function. Accordingly, sunitinib-treated tumors showed higher hypoxic fractions than properdistatin-treated tumors. Conclusions Properdistatin and sunitinib both inhibited angiogenesis, but had distinctly different effects on vascular morphology, vascular function, and extent of hypoxia in R-18 human melanoma xenografts.

Background: Sunitinib and pazopanib are extensively used as first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We performed this meta-analysis to assess the anti-tumor effectiveness, toxicity, and total costs of the two drugs among patients with mRCC/advanced RCC (aRCC).Materials and Methods: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched to obtain eligible articles. The endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse effects (AEs), and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs.Results: We included 14 medium- to high-quality studies. Both drugs were valid for mRCC/aRCC, with equivalent PFS (hazard ratio (HR) =1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-1.15, P = 0.13), OS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.79-1.07, P = 0.29), objective response rate (ORR, risk ratio (RR) =1.03, 95% CI: 0.93-1.13, p = 0.58), and disease control rate (DCR, RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.94-1.22, P = 0.54). Sunitinib had more dosage reductions and higher PPPM (weighted mean difference = - 1.50 thousand US dollars, 95% CI: - 2.27 to - 0.72, P = 0.0002). Furthermore, more incidences of severe fatigue, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were recorded for sunitinib, but pazopanib had more liver toxicity. In subgroup analysis, studies from the US reported longer OS (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77-0.95, P = 0.004) and higher ORR (RR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.03-1.51, P = 0.03).Conclusions: Pazopanib provides equivalent anti-tumor effectiveness and lower PPPM as compared with sunitinib for mRCC/aRCC. Great care should be given to pazopanib-treated patients with abnormal liver function. Nevertheless, more large-scale, high-quality studies are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sunitinib plays an important role in managing the metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Sunitinib-induced hypothyroidism is a common side-effect of the drug. There have been attempts to link hypothyroidism with a better clinical outcome in sunitinib-treated (mRCC) patients. Our aim was to relate the impact of hypothyroidism to the survival of these patients.Methods: We have evaluated 70 patients with mRCC that received sunitinib as a first line treatment. Thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) was measured at baseline, after 15 days of treatment (day-15) and at the end of the second cycle (day-75). Biomarker data and correlations with response were analysed with Microsoft Excel. Comparison results from Student's t-test with a p less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Kaplan-Meyer and log-rank tests were performed using GraphPad Prism 5 for Windows.Results: Regarding the response to treatment, a progression-free survival (PFS) of 9.47 months and an overall survival (OS) of 22.03 months were demonstrated. Our data are consistent with published data by other authors. On day-15 from the beginning of the treatment an important number of patients exhibited a TSH elevation. On day-15 42.86% had a TSH over the upper normal limit and 50.0% at the end of the second cycle (day-75). TSH increased earlier in patients that exhibited an objective response (× 3.33 times the baseline values on day-15) than patients that exhibited disease stabilisation (× 2.18) or disease progression (× 1.59). Early increases in TSH were associated with a longer PFS (11.92 vs. 8.82 months, p = 0.0476) and a longer OS (3.10 vs. 1.08 years, p = 0.0011).Conclusions: Early TSH-increase is associated with a clinical benefit. The patients that showed at least a twofold increase of their baseline TSH, responded to therapy by stabilisation or by regression of disease. This is the only study to our knowledge which shows that early increases - 2 weeks from starting the treatment - in TSH levels have a prognostic value. Both PFS and OS of the patients who demonstrated a higher than a twofold rise were significantly longer than the PFS and the OS of the patients that presented a lower or no TSH-increase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is well known that patient characteristics and survival outcomes in randomized trials may not necessarily be similar to those in real-life clinical practice. The aim of the present study was to analyse second line treatment strategies in the real-world practice and to estimate the outcomes of patients treated with second-line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Methods: This is a retrospective, registry-based study using data from the national registry of targeted therapies for mRCC. The RENIS registry contains data on 3049 patients who started the therapy with at least one targeted agent before 31 December, 2014. Of these patients, 1029 had a record of at least two different targeted therapies and sufficient data for analysis. Survival analysis was carried out using the Kaplan-Meier method. Statistical significance of differences in survival between subgroups was assessed using the log-rank test.Results: The median overall survival from the start of second-line treatment was 17.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.5-19.5 months), 17.1 months (95% CI 14.5-19.8), and 15.4 months (95% CI 11.0-19.7) for second-line everolimus, sorafenib, and sunitinib, respectively. Patients receiving second-line everolimus were older at the start of second-line treatment, more likely to have metachronous disease, and less likely to be previously treated with cytokines or to continue to third-line treatment than patients treated with second-line sunitinib or sorafenib. Progression-free survival (PFS) correlated with PFS on first-line treatment only for everolimus.Conclusions: In this retrospective study, no significant differences in survival were observed between the cohorts treated with different second-line agents including everolimus, sorafenib, and sunitinib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) are rarely encountered mesenchymal tumours of the gastrointestinal tract (1.5 people per 100,000/year) that are even more rarely seen in paediatric patients (1-2% of all cases). The standard treatment for advanced adult GIST is imatinib with sunitinib as a second-line option. Although the efficacy and tolerability of sunitinib in adults with GIST has been established, little is known of the profile of sunitinib in paediatric/young adult patients with GIST given the rarity of this disease.Methods: Paediatric/young adult patients aged up to 21 years with diagnosis of GIST who were treated with sunitinib were identified from retrospective records from three centres in Europe and the US. Most patients commenced sunitinib in a 6-week cycle, however, dosing could be reduced, delayed, changed to (or initiated with) a continuous schedule. Objective response (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours [RECIST]) and adverse events were recorded.Results: We identified 9 paediatric/young adult patients (aged 11-21 years) with GIST who were treated with sunitinib de novo (n = 1) or following failure of imatinib (n = 8). Progressive disease was previously documented for all patients including 7 patients during imatinib therapy. Baseline patient and tumour profile characteristics showed a distinct profile (notably all were wild-type KIT/PDGFR) compared to that established for adults. Sunitinib treatment was associated with a best response of stable disease for 7 patients, with disease stabilisation lasting from 1 month to >73 months and a median progression free survival time of 15 months. There was some evidence of better disease control for sunitinib when compared to prior imatinib. Most adverse events with sunitinib were manageable and all were consistent with the known profile of the agent.Conclusion: The ability to draw firm conclusions from this case series is limited by the small number of patients and the use of retrospective data which is largely reflective of the rarity of this condition. However, our findings provide initial evidence of clinical benefit and a generally manageable toxicity profile for sunitinib when administered to paediatric/young adult patients with GIST, most of whom had documented progressive disease during prior imatinib treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies comparing the effect of antiangiogenic agents targeting different angiogenic pathways are sparse. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of properdistatin and sunitinib treatment in a preclinical model of malignant melanoma. Properdistatin is a small peptide derived from the thrombospondin-1 domain of the plasma protein properdin, and sunitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting several receptors including the vascular endothelial growth factor receptors.Methods: R-18 human melanoma xenografts growing in dorsal window chambers were treated with properdistatin, sunitinib, or vehicle. Parameters describing the morphology of tumor vasculature were assessed from high-resolution transillumination images, and BST (blood supply time; the time needed for arterial blood to flow from the main supplying artery to downstream microvessels) was assessed from first-pass imaging movies recorded after a bolus of fluorescence-labeled dextran had been administered intravenously. Tumor hypoxia was assessed from immunohistochemical preparations of the imaged tissue by using pimonidazole as a hypoxia marker.Results: Properdistatin treatment selectively removed small-diameter vessels and reduced BST, whereas sunitinib treatment reduced the density of small- and large-diameter vessel similarly and did not change BST. These observations imply that properdistatin treatment reduced geometric resistance to blood flow and improved vascular function, whereas sunitinib treatment did not affect vascular function. Accordingly, sunitinib-treated tumors showed higher hypoxic fractions than properdistatin-treated tumors.Conclusions: Properdistatin and sunitinib both inhibited angiogenesis, but had distinctly different effects on vascular morphology, vascular function, and extent of hypoxia in R-18 human melanoma xenografts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A high incidence of severe hematological adverse events during sunitinib treatment complicates decision making on dose and treatment cycle. We identified the characteristics of early-onset hematotoxicity of sunitinib in Japanese patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC).Methods: Seventy-nine patients were treated with sunitinib as 6-week cycles of "4-week on 2-week off" schedule. To evaluate early-onset hematotoxicity, we compared patients with dose reduction during the first cycle (dose-reduced group, n = 57) and those who maintained the initial dose (dose-maintained group, n = 22). ABCG2 and FLT3 genotypes were analyzed for association between hematotoxicity and reported gene polymorphisms.Results: Mean relative dose intensity (RDI) was similar in the two groups during the first 2 weeks of dosing in the first cycle, but was significantly lower in the dose-reduced group during the last 2 weeks. Lymphocytopenia and thrombocytopenia were observed in the dose-reduced group within the first 2 weeks. Genetic analysis indicated a significantly higher frequency of FLT3 738 T/C polymorphism in the dose-reduced group, but no significant difference in the ABCG2 421 C/A polymorphism.Conclusions: This study showed a high incidence of sunitinib-induced hematotoxicity in Japanese patients with RCC, many of whom need dose adjustment during the first cycle. Further studies should verify whether dose adjustment based on early-onset thrombocytopenia prolongs sunitinib treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) and the Choi criteria in evaluating the early response of advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) treated with sunitinib.Methods: Eighteen patients with pathologically proven advanced GEP-NENs treated with sunitinib were enrolled in the study. Pre- and post-treatment CT scans (plain, biphasic enhanced CT scan) were performed on all patients. Changes in the target tumor size and density from pre-treatment to 1.4-3.1 months after treatment were measured and recorded for each patient. Tumor responses were identified using RECIST 1.1 and Choi criteria. The time to tumor progression (TTP) for each patient was measured and compared between groups using the Kaplan-Meier method.Results: Among the 18 patients, 4 (22%) exhibited a partial response (PR), 9 (50%) exhibited stable disease (SD), and 5 (28%) experienced progressive disease (PD), using RECIST 1.1. However, based on the Choi criteria, 8 (44%) patients exhibited a PR, 4 (22%) exhibited SD, and 6 (33%) experienced PD. According to RECIST 1.1, the median TTP of PR, SD and PD group were 16.6, 10.8 and 2.3 months, respectively. The TTP of the PR group was significantly longer than that of the PD group (P = 0.007) but insignificant when compared to the SD group (P = 0.131). According to Choi criteria, the median TTP of PR, SD and PD group were not reached, 10.8 and 2.3 months, respectively. The TTP of the PR group was significantly longer than that of the SD (P = 0.026) and PD groups (P < 0.001).Conclusion: The Choi criteria appear to be more sensitive and more precise than RECIST 1.1 in assessing the early response of advanced GEP-NENs treated with sunitinib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To compare the efficacy of sorafenib and sunitinib with regard to overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) in Chinese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Methods: A multicenter, retrospective study was performed to elucidate the relationship between clinical variables and prognosis comparing sorafenib and sunitinib as first-line treatment agents in Chinese patients with mRCC. Between September 2006 and December 2014, 845 patients received either sorafenib (400 mg bid; n = 483) or sunitinib (50 mg q.d; n = 362). The primary end point was OS and PFS.Results: The percentage of patients with low and moderate risk according to Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) score was significantly higher in sunitinib group, and that with high risk was significantly higher in sorafenib group (15.1 vs. 5.2%; p < 0.001). Median OS was similar in sorafenib and sunitinib group (24 vs. 24 months; p = 0.298). Sorafenib group exhibited higher mPFS compared to sunitinib group (11.1 vs. 10.0 months; p = 0.028). Treatment (sorafenib vs sunitinib), pathology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, MSKCC scores, Heng's criteria of risk, and number of metastases were identified as significant predictors for OS and along with liver metastasis for PFS. Clinical outcomes in terms of mOS was significantly better with sorafenib in patients ≥65 years of age (p = .041), ECOG 0 (p = 0.0001), and median MSKCC risk score (p = 0.008).Conclusions: Sorafenib and sunitinib are both effective in treating mRCC. However, sorafenib might be more effective in elderly patients (≥65 years) and in patients with an ECOG status of 0, classified under MSKCC moderate risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As a multi-targeted anti-angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor sunitinib (SUN) has been established for renal cancer and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. In advanced refractory esophagogastric cancer patients, monotherapy with SUN was associated with good tolerability but limited tumor response.Methods: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase II clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of SUN as an adjunct to second and third-line FOLFIRI (NCT01020630). Patients were randomized to receive 6-week cycles including FOLFIRI plus sodium folinate (Na-FOLFIRI) once every two weeks and SUN or placebo (PL) continuously for four weeks followed by a 2-week rest period. The primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Preplanned serum analyses of VEGF-A, VEGF-D, VEGFR2 and SDF-1α were performed retrospectively.Results: Overall, 91 patients were randomized, 45 in each group (one patient withdrew). The main grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia and leucopenia, observed in 56 %/20 % and 27 %/16 % for FOLFIRI + SUN/FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. Median PFS was similar, 3.5 vs. 3.3 months (hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95 % CI 0.70-1.74, P = 0.66) for FOLFIRI + SUN vs. FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. For FOLFIRI + SUN, a trend towards longer median overall survival (OS) compared with placebo was observed (10.4 vs. 8.9 months, HR 0.82, 95 % CI 0.50-1.34, one-sided P = 0.21). In subgroup serum analyses, significant changes in VEGF-A (P = 0.017), VEGFR2 (P = 0.012) and VEGF-D (P < 0.001) serum levels were observed.Conclusions: Although sunitinib combined with FOLFIRI did not improve PFS and response in chemotherapy-resistant gastric cancer, a trend towards better OS was observed. Further biomarker-driven studies with other anti-angiogenic RTK inhibitors are warranted.Trial Registration: This study was registered prospectively in the NCT Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) under NCT01020630 on November 23, 2009 after approval by the leading ethics committee of the Medical Association of Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, in coordination with the participating ethics committees (see Additional file 2) on September 16, 2009. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Preclinical research indicate that vascular disrupting agent (VDA) treatment induces extensive tumor death but also a systemic mobilization of bone marrow derived cells including endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) leading to revascularization and renewed growth within the residual tumor. This study investigates if combination of VDA with the anti-angiogenic agent Sunitinib increases the treatment efficacy in a colorectal liver metastases mouse model.Methods: CBA mice with established liver metastases were given a single dose of OXi4503 at day 16 post tumor induction, a daily dose of Sunitinib starting at day 14 or day 16 post tumor induction or a combination of Sunitinib given daily from day 14 or day 16 post tumor induction in combination with a single dose of OXi4503 at day 16. Treatment was terminated at day 21 post tumor induction and its effects were assessed using stereological and immunohistochemical techniques. Long term effects were assessed in a survival study.Results: Combination with long (7 day) Sunitinib treatment lead to liver toxicity but this was ameliorated in the shorter (5 day) treatment without significantly altering the effects on tumor reduction. Combination treatment resulted in significant reduction of viable tumor, reduction in tumor vasculature, reduction in tumor proliferation, increase in tumor apoptosis and prolonged mouse survival compared to control and single arm treatments. Complete tumor eradication was not achieved. Redistribution of E-cadherin and strong up regulation of ZEB1 and Vimentin were observed in the surviving tumor; indicative of epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT), a mechanism that could contribute to tumor resistance.Conclusions: Combination treatment significantly reduces viable tumor and prolongs animal survival. EMT in the surviving tumor may prevent total tumor eradication and could provide novel targets for a more lasting treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Axitinib is a potent inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor family with clinical activity in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Given this biochemical potency, the clinical activity of subsequent treatment with targeted therapies in patients progressing on axitinib is of interest.Methods: Patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma of any pathologic subtype treated with at least one cycle (four weeks) of axitinib followed by at least one subsequent targeted therapy were investigated in a retrospective analysis. Patient characteristics, duration of treatment and clinical outcomes were analyzed for axitinib and each subsequent line of therapy by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST).Results: Twenty-five mRCC patients who received at least one approved targeted agent following axitinib were identified. Eight percent of patients achieved a partial response (one patient each to sunitinib and pazopanib) and 42 % had a best response of stable disease to the first therapy after axitinib. The estimated median duration of therapy was 4.4 months (range, 0.2-27.5+). Twelve patients received a second post-axitinib targeted therapy. Six out of 11 evaluable patients (55 %) had a best response of SD. The estimated median duration of treatment was 4.8 months (range, 0.7-19.1+).Conclusion: Objective responses and stable disease is observed to post-axitinib targeted therapies and prospective studies are needed for validating role of predictive biomarkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several small studies indicated that the genotype of KIT or platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRA) contributes in part to the level of clinical effectiveness of sunitinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients. This study aimed to correlate KIT and PDGFRA mutational status with clinical outcome metrics (progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], objective response rate [ORR]) in a larger international patient population.Methods: This is a non-interventional, retrospective analysis in patients with imatinib-resistant or intolerant GIST who were treated in a worldwide, open-label treatment-use study (Study 1036; NCT00094029) in which sunitinib was administered at a starting dose of 50 mg/day on a 4-week-on, 2-week-off schedule. Molecular status was obtained in local laboratories with tumor samples obtained either pre-imatinib, post-imatinib/pre-sunitinib, or post-sunitinib treatment, and all available data were used in the analyses regardless of collection time. The primary analysis compared PFS in patients with primary KIT exon 11 versus exon 9 mutations (using a 2-sided log-rank test) and secondary analyses compared OS (using the same test) and ORR (using a 2-sided Pearson χ(2) test) in the same molecular subgroups.Results: Of the 1124 sunitinib-treated patients in the treatment-use study, 230 (20%) were included in this analysis, and baseline characteristics were similar between the two study populations. Median PFS was 7.1 months. A significantly better PFS was observed in patients with a primary mutation in KIT exon 9 (n = 42) compared to those with a primary mutation in exon 11 (n = 143; hazard ratio = 0.59; 95 % confidence interval, 0.39-0.89; P = 0.011), with median PFS times of 12.3 and 7.0 months, respectively. Similarly, longer OS and higher ORR were observed in patients with a primary KIT mutation in exon 9 versus exon 11. The data available were limited to investigate the effects of additional KIT or PDGFRA mutations on the efficacy of sunitinib treatment.Conclusions: This large retrospective analysis confirms the prognostic significance of KIT mutation status in patients with GIST. This analysis also confirms the effectiveness of sunitinib as a post-imatinib therapy, regardless of mutational status.Trial Registration: NCT01459757. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical studies implying the sunitinib multi-kinase inhibitor have led to disappointing results for breast cancer care but mostly focused on HER2-negative subtypes. Preclinical researches involving this drug mostly concern Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) murine models. Here, we explored the therapeutic efficacy of sunitinib on a PyMT-derived transplanted model classified as luminal B (HER2-positive) and monitored the response to treatment using both in vivo and ex vivo approaches. Methods: Tumour-induced animals were treated for 9 (n = 7) or 14 (n = 8) days with sunitinib at 40 mg/kg or with vehicle only. Response to therapy was assessed in vivo by monitoring glucose tumour metabolism and hypoxia using 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) and [18F]fluoromisonidazole ([18F]FMISO) Positron Emission Tomography (PET). After primary tumour excision, ex vivo digital microscopy was performed on treated and control samples to estimate vascular density (CD31), apoptosis (Tunel), proliferation (Ki-67), Tumour-Associated Macrophage (TAM) infiltration (F4/80), metabolism (GLUT1) and cellular response to hypoxia (HIF1 alpha). The drug impact on the metastasis rate was evaluated by monitoring the PyMT gene expression in the lungs of the treated and control groups. Results: Concomitant with sunitinib-induced tumour size regression, [18F]FDG PET imaging showed a stable glycolysis-related metabolism inside tumours undergoing treatment compared to an increased metabolism in untreated tumours, resulting at treatment end in 1.5 less [18F]FDG uptake in treated (n = 4) vs control (n = 3) tumours (p < 0.05). With this small sample, [18F]FMISO PET showed a non-significant decrease of hypoxia in treated vs control tumours. The drug triggered a 4.9 fold vascular volume regression (p < 0.05), as well as a 17.7 fold induction of tumour cell apoptosis (p < 0.001). The hypoxia induced factor 1 alpha (HIF1 alpha) expression was twice lower in the treated group than in the control group (p < 0.05). Moreover, the occurrence of lung metastases was not reduced by the drug. Conclusions: [18F]FDG and [18F]FMISO PET were relevant approaches to study the response to sunitinib in this luminal B (HER2-positive) model. The sunitinib-induced vascular network shrinkage did not significantly increase tumour hypoxia, suggesting that tumour regression was mainly due to the pro-apoptotic properties of the drug. Sunitinib did not inhibit the metastatic process in this PyMT transplanted model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Based on the mechanism of action, combining somatostatin analogues (SSAs) with mTOR inhibitors or antiangiogenic agents may provide synergistic effects for the treatment of patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). Herein, we investigate the use of these treatment combinations in clinical practice. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients with NETs treated with the SSA lanreotide and targeted therapies at 35 Spanish hospitals evaluated the efficacy and safety of lanreotide treatment combinations in clinical practice. The data of 159 treatment combinations with lanreotide in 133 patients was retrospectively collected. Results: Of the 133 patients, with a median age of 59.4 (16-83) years, 70 (52.6 %) patients were male, 64 (48.1 %) had pancreatic NET, 23 (17.3 %) had ECOG PS ≥2, 41 (30.8 %) had functioning tumours, 63 (47.7 %) underwent surgery of the primary tumour, 45 (33.8 %) had received prior chemotherapy, and 115 (86.5 %) had received prior SSAs. 115 patients received 1 lanreotide treatment combination and 18 patients received between 2 and 5 combinations. Lanreotide was mainly administered in combination with everolimus (73 combinations) or sunitinib (61 combinations). The probability of being progression-free was 78.5 % (6 months), 68.6 % (12 months) and 57.0 % (18 months) for patients who only received everolimus plus lanreotide (n = 57) and 89.3 % (6 months), 73.0 % (12 months), and 67.4 % (18 months) for patients who only received sunitinib and lanreotide (n = 50). In patients who only received everolimus plus lanreotide the median time-to-progression from the initiation of lanreotide combination treatment was 25.8 months (95 % CI, 11.3, 40.3) and it had not yet been reached among the subgroup of patients only receiving sunitinib plus lanreotide. The safety profile of the combination treatment was comparable to that of the targeted agent alone. Conclusions: The combination of lanreotide and targeted therapies, mainly everolimus and sunitinib, is widely used in clinical practice without unexpected toxicities and suggests efficacy that should be explored in randomized prospective clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]