Search

PurposeCabozantinib (XL184) is an orally bioavailable tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against MET and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2. We evaluated the activity of cabozantinib in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in a phase II randomized discontinuation trial with an expansion cohort.Patients and methodsPatients received 100 mg of cabozantinib daily. Those with stable disease per RECIST at 12 weeks were randomly assigned to cabozantinib or placebo. Primary end points were objective response rate at 12 weeks and progression-free survival (PFS) after random assignment.ResultsOne hundred seventy-one men with CRPC were enrolled. Random assignment was halted early based on the observed activity of cabozantinib. Seventy-two percent of patients had regression in soft tissue lesions, whereas 68% of evaluable patients had improvement on bone scan, including complete resolution in 12%. The objective response rate at 12 weeks was 5%, with stable disease in 75% of patients. Thirty-one patients with stable disease at week 12 were randomly assigned. Median PFS was 23.9 weeks (95% CI, 10.7 to 62.4 weeks) with cabozantinib and 5.9 weeks (95% CI, 5.4 to 6.6 weeks) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.12; P < .001). Serum total alkaline phosphatase and plasma cross-linked C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen were reduced by ≥ 50% in 57% of evaluable patients. On retrospective review, bone pain improved in 67% of evaluable patients, with a decrease in narcotic use in 56%. The most common grade 3 adverse events were fatigue (16%), hypertension (12%), and hand-foot syndrome (8%).ConclusionCabozantinib has clinical activity in men with CRPC, including reduction of soft tissue lesions, improvement in PFS, resolution of bone scans, and reductions in bone turnover markers, pain, and narcotic use.

Background: In the phase 3 METEOR trial, cabozantinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus everolimus in patients with advanced RCC after prior antiangiogenic therapy. Methods: In this exploratory analysis, plasma biomarkers from baseline and week 4 from 621 of 658 randomized patients were analyzed for CA9, HGF, MET, GAS6, AXL, VEGF, VEGFR2, and IL-8. PFS and OS were analyzed by baseline biomarker levels as both dichotomized and continuous variables using univariate and multivariable methods. For on-treatment changes, PFS and OS were analyzed using fold change in biomarker levels at week 4. Biomarkers were considered prognostic if p < 0.05 and predictive if pinteraction < 0.05 for the interaction between treatment and biomarker. Results: Hazard ratios for PFS and OS favored cabozantinib versus everolimus for both low and high baseline levels of all biomarkers (hazard ratios ≤0.78). In univariate analyses, low baseline HGF, AXL, and VEGF were prognostic for improvements in both PFS and OS with cabozantinib, and low HGF was prognostic for improvements in both PFS and OS with everolimus. Low AXL was predictive of relative improvement in PFS for cabozantinib versus everolimus. Results were generally consistent when baseline biomarkers were expressed as continuous variables, although none were predictive of benefit with treatment. In multivariable analysis, low baseline HGF was independently prognostic for improved PFS for both cabozantinib and everolimus; low HGF, GAS6, and VEGF were independently prognostic for improved OS with cabozantinib. No biomarkers were independently prognostic for OS with everolimus. On-treatment increases in some biomarkers appeared prognostic for PFS or OS with cabozantinib in univariate analyses; however, none were independently prognostic in multivariable analysis. Conclusions: PFS and OS were improved with cabozantinib versus everolimus at high and low baseline levels of all biomarkers. Low baseline HGF was consistently identified as a prognostic biomarker for improved PFS or OS with cabozantinib or everolimus, supporting further prospective evaluation of the prognostic significance of HGF in advanced RCC. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01865747 (registered on 05/31/2013). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wang is employed by Exelixis; and has stock/ownership interests with Exelixis.Dr. Powles has received honoraria from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Incyte, Ipsen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Merck, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seattle Genetics; has a consulting or advisory role with Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Incyte, Ipsen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seattle Genetics; has received research funding from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Ipsen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seattle Genetics; and has received travel/accommodation/other expenses from AstraZeneca, Ipsen, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche.Dr. Powles has received honoraria from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Incyte, Ipsen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seattle Genetics; has a consulting or advisory role with Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Incyte, Ipsen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seattle Genetics; has received research funding from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Ipsen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seattle Genetics; and has received travel/accommodation/other expenses from AstraZeneca, Ipsen, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche.Competing interestsDr. [Extracted from the article]