Dutch Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST) Registry Data Comparing Sunitinib with Imatinib Dose Escalation in Second-Line Advanced Non-KIT Exon 9 Mutated GIST Patients

Sunitinib for the treatment of metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors: the effect of TDM-guided dose optimization on clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Sunitinib is an oral anticancer drug approved for the treatment of among others gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Previous analyses demonstrated an exposure-response relationship at the standard dose, and minimum target levels of drug exposure have been defined above which better treatment outcomes are observed. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) could be used as a tool to optimize the individual dose, aiming at sunitinib trough concentrations ≥37.5 ng/ml for continuous dosing. Nonetheless, data on the added value of TDM-guided dosing on clinical endpoints are currently lacking. Therefore, we evaluate the effect of TDM in patients with advanced and metastatic GIST treated with sunitinib in terms of efficacy and toxicity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A TDM-guided cohort was compared to a non-TDM-guided cohort in terms of median progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS). Also, mPFS between patients with and without dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) was compared. Patients in the prospective cohort were included in two studies on TDM-guided dosing (the DPOG-TDM study and TUNE study). The retrospective cohort consisted of patients from the Dutch GIST Registry who did not receive TDM-guided dosing.

RESULTS

In total, 51 and 106 patients were included in the TDM-guided cohort and non-TDM-guided cohort, respectively. No statistical difference in mPFS was observed between these two cohorts (39.4 versus 46.9 weeks, respectively; P = 0.52). Patients who experienced sunitinib-induced DLTs had longer mPFS compared to those who did not (51.9 versus 28.9 weeks, respectively; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results do not support the routine use of TDM-guided dose optimization of sunitinib in patients with advanced/metastatic GIST to improve survival.

Individualized Dosing Patterns in the Treatment of Older Patients with Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: Results of a Registry-Based Observational National Cohort Study Including 871 Patients

BACKGROUND

While the effectiveness of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) seems similar in older patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) compared with younger patients, toxicities in older patients treated with TKIs more often lead to discontinuation of treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To better understand the age-related pharmacology and pharmacodynamic differences in patients with GIST treated with TKIs, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate TKI dosing patterns in older patients with GIST, while the secondary aims were to evaluate differences in imatinib trough plasma concentrations between age groups and to compare the overall survival (OS) in patients with and without dose reductions in all treatment lines in a palliative setting.

METHODS

Patients (18 years of age or older) with histologically proven GIST diagnosed between January 2009 and June 2021 and treated with one or more lines of TKIs were selected from the Dutch GIST Registry (DGR) database. Age groups were divided into younger patients (age <70 years) and older patients (age ≥70 years). All imatinib trough plasma concentrations of blood withdrawals taken from initiation of imatinib until a maximum of 1 year of treatment with imatinib were collected. Reasons for first adjustment of treatment were classified as adverse event, dose modification, progressive disease and other reasons. The next treatment steps after first adjustment of treatment were defined as dose escalation, dose reduction, dose interruption, or end of treatment. The association of dose reduction and OS was analyzed using the landmark approach.

RESULTS

Overall, 871 patients were included in this study, including 577 younger patients and 294 older patients. Older patients more often had an adverse event as the reason for first adjustment of treatment with both imatinib (45.6%; p < 0.001) and sunitinib (58.6%; p = 0.224) compared with younger patients (19.5% and 42.7%, respectively). Adjustment of imatinib and sunitinib after starting on a standard dose because of an adverse event most often resulted in dose reduction in both age groups. Median trough plasma concentrations of all samples taken within the first year after initiation of imatinib were higher in older patients (1228 ng/mL, interquartile range [IQR] 959-1687) compared with younger patients (1035 ng/mL [IQR 773-1377]; p < 0.001). No significant differences were seen between OS in patients with or without dose reduction in all treatment lines (imatinib: p = 0.270; sunitinib: p = 0.547; and regorafenib: p = 0.784).

CONCLUSION

Older patients showed higher imatinib trough plasma concentrations compared with younger patients and also had earlier and more often adverse events as the reason for first adjustment of treatment with imatinib followed by dose reduction. However, in a landmark analysis, patients with imatinib dose reductions had no poorer outcomes compared with patients not requiring a dose reduction.