Search

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma.Methods: We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01108445.Findings: Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months [80% CI 5·8-11·4] vs 5·6 months [5·5-6·0]; hazard ratio 1·41 [80% CI 1·03-1·92]; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (12 [24%] of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one [2%] of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six [12%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (five [10%] vs one [2%]), pneumonitis (none vs five [9%]), stomatitis (none vs five [9%]), and hand-foot syndrome (four [8%] vs none).Interpretation: In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors.Funding: Novartis and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a clinical trial comparing two treatment groups, one commonly-used endpoint is time to death. Another is time until the first nonfatal event (if there is one) or until death (if not). Both endpoints have drawbacks. The wrong choice may adversely affect the value of the study by impairing power if deaths are too few (with the first endpoint) or by lessening the role of mortality if not (with the second endpoint). We propose a compromise that provides a simple test based on the time to death if the patient has died or time since randomization augmented by an increment otherwise. The test applies the ordinary two-sample Wilcoxon statistic to these values. The formula for the increment (the same for experimental and control patients) must be specified before the trial starts. In the simplest (and perhaps most useful) case, the increment assumes only two values, according to whether or not the (surviving) patient had a nonfatal event. More generally, the increment depends on the time of the first nonfatal event, if any, and the time since randomization. The test has correct Type I error even though it does not handle censoring in a customary way. For conditions where investigators would face no easy (advance) choice between the two older tests, simulation results favor the new test. An example using a renal-cancer trial is presented. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND The current study was conducted to investigate the dependence between progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and to explore whether PFS can be used as an intermediate endpoint of OS in this patient population. METHODS A total of 1381 patients from 2 prospective phase 3 trials (Cancer and Leukemia Group B [CALGB] 90206 and AVOREN) of interferon-alpha with or without bevacizumab were analyzed. Both trials recruited previously untreated patients with clear cell mRCC with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2; adequate bone marrow, hepatic, cardiac, and renal function; and controlled blood pressure. The CALGB study served as the training data set, and the AVOREN study served as the testing data set. The dependence between PFS and OS was investigated using the Kendall tau for bivariate time-to-event endpoints. RESULTS In the training data set, the median OS times among patients who experienced progressive disease at 3 months or 6 months were 6 months and 8 months, respectively, compared with 25 months and 30 months, respectively, ( P < .001) in patients who did not develop disease progress. The adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were 2.6 ( P < .0001) and 2.8 ( P < .0001), respectively, for patients who did and did not progress at 3 months or 6 months. The dependence between PFS and OS was 0.53. These associations were confirmed in the testing data set. CONCLUSIONS In patients with mRCC who were treated with interferon-alpha with or without bevacizumab, the PFS at 3 months and 6 months was found to be predictive of OS. A high dependence between PFS and OS was observed, suggesting that PFS may be used as a surrogate endpoint for OS. Although this is a novel observation for RCC, these findings require validation in patients with mRCC who are treated with other targeted agents. Cancer 2014;120:52-60. © 2013 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A prognostic model that predicts overall survival (OS) for metastatic urothelial cancer (MetUC) patients treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy was developed, validated, and compared with a commonly used Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk-score model. Data from 7 protocols that enrolled 308 patients with MetUC were pooled. An external multi-institutional dataset was used to validate the model. The primary measurement of predictive discrimination was Harrell’s c-index, computed with 95% confidence interval (CI). The final model included four pretreatment variables to predict OS: visceral metastases, albumin, performance status, and hemoglobin. The Harrell’s c-index was 0.67 for the four-variable model and 0.64 for the MSKCC risk-score model, with a prediction improvement for OS (the U statistic and its standard deviation were used to calculate the two-sided P = .002). In the validation cohort, the c-indices for the four-variable and the MSKCC risk-score models were 0.63 (95% CI = 0.56 to 0.69) and 0.58 (95% CI = 0.52 to 0.65), respectively, with superiority of the four-variable model compared with the MSKCC risk-score model for OS (the U statistic and its standard deviation were used to calculate the two-sided P = .02). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]