A comparison of sunitinib with cabozantinib, crizotinib, and savolitinib for treatment of advanced papillary renal cell carcinoma: a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.
Aged
Anilides
/ administration & dosage
Canada
Carcinoma, Renal Cell
/ drug therapy
Crizotinib
/ administration & dosage
Female
Humans
Kidney Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Male
Middle Aged
Progression-Free Survival
Protein Kinase Inhibitors
/ administration & dosage
Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-met
/ drug effects
Pyrazines
/ administration & dosage
Pyridines
/ administration & dosage
Sunitinib
/ administration & dosage
Triazines
/ administration & dosage
United States
Journal
Lancet (London, England)
ISSN: 1474-547X
Titre abrégé: Lancet
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2985213R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 02 2021
20 02 2021
Historique:
received:
31
12
2020
revised:
14
01
2021
accepted:
20
01
2021
pubmed:
17
2
2021
medline:
1
7
2021
entrez:
16
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
MET (also known as hepatocyte growth factor receptor) signalling is a key driver of papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC). Given that no optimal therapy for metastatic PRCC exists, we aimed to compare an existing standard of care, sunitinib, with the MET kinase inhibitors cabozantinib, crizotinib, and savolitinib for treatment of patients with PRCC. We did a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial done in 65 centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with metastatic PRCC who had received up to one previous therapy (excluding vascular endothelial growth factor-directed and MET-directed agents). Patients were randomly assigned to receive sunitinib, cabozantinib, crizotinib, or savolitinib, with stratification by receipt of previous therapy and PRCC subtype. All drug doses were administered orally: sunitinib 50 mg, 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off (dose reductions to 37·5 mg and 25 mg allowed); cabozantinib 60 mg daily (reductions to 40 mg and 20 mg allowed); crizotinib 250 mg twice daily (reductions to 200 mg twice daily and 250 mg once daily allowed); and savolitinib 600 mg daily (reductions to 400 mg and 200 mg allowed). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint. Analyses were done in an intention-to-treat population, with patients who did not receive protocol therapy excluded from safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02761057. Between April 5, 2016, and Dec 15, 2019, 152 patients were randomly assigned to one of four study groups. Five patients were identified as ineligible post-randomisation and were excluded from these analyses, resulting in 147 eligible patients. Assignment to the savolitinib (29 patients) and crizotinib (28 patients) groups was halted after a prespecified futility analysis; planned accrual was completed for both sunitinib (46 patients) and cabozantinib (44 patients) groups. PFS was longer in patients in the cabozantinib group (median 9·0 months, 95% CI 6-12) than in the sunitinib group (5·6 months, 3-7; hazard ratio for progression or death 0·60, 0·37-0·97, one-sided p=0·019). Response rate for cabozantinib was 23% versus 4% for sunitinib (two-sided p=0·010). Savolitinib and crizotinib did not improve PFS compared with sunitinib. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 31 (69%) of 45 patients receiving sunitinib, 32 (74%) of 43 receiving cabozantinib, ten (37%) of 27 receiving crizotinib, and 11 (39%) of 28 receiving savolitinib; one grade 5 thromboembolic event was recorded in the cabozantinib group. Cabozantinib treatment resulted in significantly longer PFS compared with sunitinib in patients with metastatic PRCC. National Institutes of Health and National Cancer Institute.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
MET (also known as hepatocyte growth factor receptor) signalling is a key driver of papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC). Given that no optimal therapy for metastatic PRCC exists, we aimed to compare an existing standard of care, sunitinib, with the MET kinase inhibitors cabozantinib, crizotinib, and savolitinib for treatment of patients with PRCC.
METHODS
We did a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial done in 65 centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with metastatic PRCC who had received up to one previous therapy (excluding vascular endothelial growth factor-directed and MET-directed agents). Patients were randomly assigned to receive sunitinib, cabozantinib, crizotinib, or savolitinib, with stratification by receipt of previous therapy and PRCC subtype. All drug doses were administered orally: sunitinib 50 mg, 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off (dose reductions to 37·5 mg and 25 mg allowed); cabozantinib 60 mg daily (reductions to 40 mg and 20 mg allowed); crizotinib 250 mg twice daily (reductions to 200 mg twice daily and 250 mg once daily allowed); and savolitinib 600 mg daily (reductions to 400 mg and 200 mg allowed). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint. Analyses were done in an intention-to-treat population, with patients who did not receive protocol therapy excluded from safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02761057.
FINDINGS
Between April 5, 2016, and Dec 15, 2019, 152 patients were randomly assigned to one of four study groups. Five patients were identified as ineligible post-randomisation and were excluded from these analyses, resulting in 147 eligible patients. Assignment to the savolitinib (29 patients) and crizotinib (28 patients) groups was halted after a prespecified futility analysis; planned accrual was completed for both sunitinib (46 patients) and cabozantinib (44 patients) groups. PFS was longer in patients in the cabozantinib group (median 9·0 months, 95% CI 6-12) than in the sunitinib group (5·6 months, 3-7; hazard ratio for progression or death 0·60, 0·37-0·97, one-sided p=0·019). Response rate for cabozantinib was 23% versus 4% for sunitinib (two-sided p=0·010). Savolitinib and crizotinib did not improve PFS compared with sunitinib. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 31 (69%) of 45 patients receiving sunitinib, 32 (74%) of 43 receiving cabozantinib, ten (37%) of 27 receiving crizotinib, and 11 (39%) of 28 receiving savolitinib; one grade 5 thromboembolic event was recorded in the cabozantinib group.
INTERPRETATION
Cabozantinib treatment resulted in significantly longer PFS compared with sunitinib in patients with metastatic PRCC.
FUNDING
National Institutes of Health and National Cancer Institute.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33592176
pii: S0140-6736(21)00152-5
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00152-5
pmc: PMC8687736
mid: NIHMS1684572
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anilides
0
Protein Kinase Inhibitors
0
Pyrazines
0
Pyridines
0
Triazines
0
cabozantinib
1C39JW444G
1-(1-(imidazo(1,2-a)pyridin-6-yl)ethyl)-6-(1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-1H-(1,2,3)triazolo(4,5-b)pyrazine
2A2DA6857R
Crizotinib
53AH36668S
MET protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-met
EC 2.7.10.1
Sunitinib
V99T50803M
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02761057']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase II
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
695-703Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U10 CA180868
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA093373
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : CA180863
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : CA180819
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : CA180868
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U10 CA180821
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : CA180888
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : UG1 CA233160
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U10 CA180863
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U10 CA180820
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U10 CA180888
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U10 CA180819
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : CA180820
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : CA180821
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Références
Eur Urol. 2016 May;69(5):866-74
pubmed: 26626617
Cancer Res. 2007 May 1;67(9):4408-17
pubmed: 17483355
Eur J Cancer. 2018 May;94:115-125
pubmed: 29550566
Eur Urol. 2018 Jan;73(1):71-78
pubmed: 28592388
Ann Oncol. 2015 Jun;26(6):1123-1128
pubmed: 25802238
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jan 10;31(2):181-6
pubmed: 23213094
Br J Cancer. 2015 Aug 11;113(4):616-25
pubmed: 26180925
Mol Cancer Ther. 2011 Dec;10(12):2298-308
pubmed: 21926191
JAMA Oncol. 2020 Aug 1;6(8):1247-1255
pubmed: 32469384
Am J Surg Pathol. 2013 Oct;37(10):1469-89
pubmed: 24025519
N Engl J Med. 2016 Jan 14;374(2):135-45
pubmed: 26536169
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Mar;17(3):378-388
pubmed: 26794930
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Jul 1;20(13):3411-21
pubmed: 24658158
Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2017;37:337-342
pubmed: 28561708
Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014 Oct 15;7(11):7681-9
pubmed: 25550804
Eur Urol. 2016 Jul;70(1):93-105
pubmed: 26935559
Eur Urol. 2012 Dec;62(6):1013-9
pubmed: 22771265
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Sep 10;35(26):2993-3001
pubmed: 28644771
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Apr;20(4):581-590
pubmed: 30827746
Biometrics. 1975 Mar;31(1):103-15
pubmed: 1100130
Mol Oncol. 2015 Jan;9(1):323-33
pubmed: 25248999
Eur J Cancer. 2017 Dec;87:147-163
pubmed: 29149761