Cediranib monotherapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: results of a randomised phase II study

New hopes and promises in the treatment of ovarian cancer focusing on targeted treatment-a narrative review

Unfortunately, ovarian cancer is still diagnosed most often only in an advanced stage and is also the most lethal gynecological cancer. Another problem is the fact that treated patients have a high risk of disease recurrence. Moreover, ovarian cancer is very diverse in terms of molecular, histological features and mutations. Many patients may also develop platinum resistance, resulting in poor response to subsequent lines of treatment. To improve the prognosis of patients with ovarian cancer, it is expected to make better existing and implement new, promising treatment methods. Targeted therapies seem very promising. Currently, bevacizumab - a VEGF inhibitor and therapy with olaparib - a polyADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor are approved. Other methods worth considering in the future include: folate receptor α, immune checkpoints or other immunotherapy methods. To improve the treatment of ovarian cancer, it is also important to ameliorate the determination of molecular features to describe and understand which group of patients will benefit most from a given treatment method. This is important because a larger group of patients treated for ovarian cancer can have a greater chance of surviving longer without recurrence.

First-line therapy for adults with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Since the approval of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, the treatment landscape for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed fundamentally. Today, combined therapies from different drug categories have a firm place in a complex first-line therapy. Due to the large number of drugs available, it is necessary to identify the most effective therapies, whilst considering their side effects and impact on quality of life (QoL).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the benefits and harms of first-line therapies for adults with advanced RCC, and to produce a clinically relevant ranking of therapies. Secondary objectives were to maintain the currency of the evidence by conducting continuous update searches, using a living systematic review approach, and to incorporate data from clinical study reports (CSRs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings and relevant trial registries up until 9 February 2022. We searched several data platforms to identify CSRs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating at least one targeted therapy or immunotherapy for first-line treatment of adults with advanced RCC. We excluded trials evaluating only interleukin-2 versus interferon-alpha as well as trials with an adjuvant treatment setting. We also excluded trials with adults who received prior systemic anticancer therapy if more than 10% of participants were previously treated, or if data for untreated participants were not separately extractable.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All necessary review steps (i.e. screening and study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and certainty assessments) were conducted independently by at least two review authors. Our outcomes were overall survival (OS), QoL, serious adverse events (SAEs), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), the number of participants who discontinued study treatment due to an AE, and the time to initiation of first subsequent therapy. Where possible, analyses were conducted for the different risk groups (favourable, intermediate, poor) according to the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Score (IMDC) or the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) criteria. Our main comparator was sunitinib (SUN). A hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) lower than 1.0 is in favour of the experimental arm.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 36 RCTs and 15,177 participants (11,061 males and 4116 females). Risk of bias was predominantly judged as being 'high' or 'some concerns' across most trials and outcomes. This was mainly due to a lack of information about the randomisation process, the blinding of outcome assessors, and methods for outcome measurements and analyses. Additionally, study protocols and statistical analysis plans were rarely available. Here we present the results for our primary outcomes OS, QoL, and SAEs, and for all risk groups combined for contemporary treatments: pembrolizumab + axitinib (PEM+AXI), avelumab + axitinib (AVE+AXI), nivolumab + cabozantinib (NIV+CAB), lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (LEN+PEM), nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIV+IPI), CAB, and pazopanib (PAZ). Results per risk group and results for our secondary outcomes are reported in the summary of findings tables and in the full text of this review. The evidence on other treatments and comparisons can also be found in the full text. Overall survival (OS) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI (HR 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.07, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.00, moderate certainty) probably improve OS, compared to SUN, respectively. LEN+PEM may improve OS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03, low certainty), compared to SUN. There is probably little or no difference in OS between PAZ and SUN (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.32, moderate certainty), and we are uncertain whether CAB improves OS when compared to SUN (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.64, very low certainty). The median survival is 28 months when treated with SUN. Survival may improve to 43 months with LEN+PEM, and probably improves to: 41 months with NIV+IPI, 39 months with PEM+AXI, and 31 months with PAZ. We are uncertain whether survival improves to 34 months with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB. Quality of life (QoL) One RCT measured QoL using FACIT-F (score range 0 to 52; higher scores mean better QoL) and reported that the mean post-score was 9.00 points higher (9.86 lower to 27.86 higher, very low certainty) with PAZ than with SUN. Comparison data were not available for PEM+AXI, AVE+AXI, NIV+CAB, LEN+PEM, NIV+IPI, and CAB. Serious adverse events (SAEs) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI probably increases slightly the risk for SAEs (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.85, moderate certainty) compared to SUN. LEN+PEM (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.19, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.97, moderate certainty) probably increase the risk for SAEs, compared to SUN, respectively. There is probably little or no difference in the risk for SAEs between PAZ and SUN (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.31, moderate certainty). We are uncertain whether CAB reduces or increases the risk for SAEs (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.43, very low certainty) when compared to SUN. People have a mean risk of 40% for experiencing SAEs when treated with SUN. The risk increases probably to: 61% with LEN+PEM, 57% with NIV+IPI, and 52% with PEM+AXI. It probably remains at 40% with PAZ. We are uncertain whether the risk reduces to 37% with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings concerning the main treatments of interest comes from direct evidence of one trial only, thus results should be interpreted with caution. More trials are needed where these interventions and combinations are compared head-to-head, rather than just to SUN. Moreover, assessing the effect of immunotherapies and targeted therapies on different subgroups is essential and studies should focus on assessing and reporting relevant subgroup data. The evidence in this review mostly applies to advanced clear cell RCC.

Molecular Aspects and Therapeutic Implications of Herbal Compounds Targeting Different Types of Cancer

Due to genetic changes in DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) sequences, cancer continues to be the second most prevalent cause of death. The traditional target-directed approach, which is confronted with the importance of target function in healthy cells, is one of the most significant challenges in anticancer research. Another problem with cancer cells is that they experience various mutations, changes in gene duplication, and chromosomal abnormalities, all of which have a direct influence on the potency of anticancer drugs at different developmental stages. All of these factors combine to make cancer medication development difficult, with low clinical licensure success rates when compared to other therapy categories. The current review focuses on the pathophysiology and molecular aspects of common cancer types. Currently, the available chemotherapeutic drugs, also known as combination chemotherapy, are associated with numerous adverse effects, resulting in the search for herbal-based alternatives that attenuate resistance due to cancer therapy and exert chemo-protective actions. To provide new insights, this review updated the list of key compounds that may enhance the efficacy of cancer treatment.

Management of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations for the management of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

METHODS

An Expert Panel conducted a systematic literature review to obtain evidence to guide treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel considered peer-reviewed reports published in English.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The diagnosis of metastatic ccRCC should be made using tissue biopsy of the primary tumor or a metastatic site with the inclusion of markers and/or stains to support the diagnosis. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk criteria should be used to inform treatment. Cytoreductive nephrectomy may be offered to select patients with kidney-in-place and favorable- or intermediate-risk disease. For those who have already had a nephrectomy, an initial period of active surveillance may be offered if they are asymptomatic with a low burden of disease. Patients with favorable-risk disease who need systemic therapy may be offered an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in combination with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI); patients with intermediate or poor risk should be offered a doublet regimen (no recommendation was provided between ICIs or an ICI in combination with a VEGFR TKI). For select patients, monotherapy with either an ICI or a VEGFR TKI may be offered on the basis of comorbidities. Interleukin-2 remains an option, although selection criteria could not be identified. Recommendations are also provided for second- and subsequent-line therapy as well as the treatment of bone metastases, brain metastases, or the presence of sarcomatoid features. Participation in clinical trials is highly encouraged for patients with metastatic ccRCC.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines.

Phase I study of cediranib, an oral VEGFR inhibitor, in combination with selumetinib, an oral MEK inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid malignancies

PURPOSE

Targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway improves progression free survival in multiple advanced malignancies but durable responses are uncommon. Inhibition of the VEGF pathway at multiple levels of signal transduction may improve clinical outcomes. Preclinical data with cediranib, an inhibitor of all 3 VEGF receptors, in combination with selumetinib, an inhibitor of MEK 1/2, demonstrated improved tumor control experimentally. This phase I trial was designed to test the two agents in combination to evaluate the tolerability, safety and assess disease response.

METHODS

Patients with advanced solid malignancies were enrolled into this phase I trial. Cediranib and selumetinib were dosed using a toxicity-adaptive isotonic design for the dose escalation/de-escalation of each agent. Both cediranib and selumetinib were administered daily and continuously. Cycles were 28 days in length.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were enrolled. At all dose levels, dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed, which limited dose escalation and further evaluation. The maximum tolerated dose of cediranib and selumetinib in combination could not be determined. The best response of stable disease was observed in eight patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Cediranib and selumetinib in combination on a continuous schedule was not tolerable, with patients experiencing cardiovascular and other DLTs. Intermittent schedules may be needed to establish a safe and tolerable combination of cediranib and selumetinib.

The WIRE study a phase II, multi-arm, multi-centre, non-randomised window-of-opportunity clinical trial platform using a Bayesian adaptive design for proof-of-mechanism of novel treatment strategies in operable renal cell cancer - a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Window-of-opportunity trials, evaluating the engagement of drugs with their biological target in the time period between diagnosis and standard-of-care treatment, can help prioritise promising new systemic treatments for later-phase clinical trials. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the 7th commonest solid cancer in the UK, exhibits targets for multiple new systemic anti-cancer agents including DNA damage response inhibitors, agents targeting vascular pathways and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Here we present the trial protocol for the WIndow-of-opportunity clinical trial platform for evaluation of novel treatment strategies in REnal cell cancer (WIRE).

METHODS

WIRE is a Phase II, multi-arm, multi-centre, non-randomised, proof-of-mechanism (single and combination investigational medicinal product [IMP]), platform trial using a Bayesian adaptive design. The Bayesian adaptive design leverages outcome information from initial participants during pre-specified interim analyses to determine and minimise the number of participants required to demonstrate efficacy or futility. Patients with biopsy-proven, surgically resectable, cT1b+, cN0-1, cM0-1 clear cell RCC and no contraindications to the IMPs are eligible to participate. Participants undergo diagnostic staging CT and renal mass biopsy followed by treatment in one of the treatment arms for at least 14 days. Initially, the trial includes five treatment arms with cediranib, cediranib + olaparib, olaparib, durvalumab and durvalumab + olaparib. Participants undergo a multiparametric MRI before and after treatment. Vascularised and de-vascularised tissue is collected at surgery. A ≥ 30% increase in CD8+ T-cells on immunohistochemistry between the screening and nephrectomy is the primary endpoint for durvalumab-containing arms. Meanwhile, a reduction in tumour vascular permeability measured by Ktrans on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI by ≥30% is the primary endpoint for other arms. Secondary outcomes include adverse events and tumour size change. Exploratory outcomes include biomarkers of drug mechanism and treatment effects in blood, urine, tissue and imaging.

DISCUSSION

WIRE is the first trial using a window-of-opportunity design to demonstrate pharmacological activity of novel single and combination treatments in RCC in the pre-surgical space. It will provide rationale for prioritising promising treatments for later phase trials and support the development of new biomarkers of treatment effect with its extensive translational agenda.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03741426 / EudraCT: 2018-003056-21 .

Reporting of harms in oncological clinical study reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency compared to trial registries and publications-a methodological review

BACKGROUND

An accurate and comprehensive assessment of harms is a fundamental part of an accurate weighing of benefits and harms of an intervention when making treatment decisions; however, harms are known to be underreported in journal publications. Therefore, we sought to compare the completeness of reporting of harm data, discrepancies in harm data reported, and the delay to access results of oncological clinical trials between three sources: clinical study reports (CSRs), clinical trial registries and journal publications.

METHODS

We used the EMA clinical data website to identify all trials submitted to the EMA between 2015 and 2018. We retrieved all CSRs and included all phase II, II/III or III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing targeted therapy and immunotherapy for cancer. We then identified related records in clinical trial registries and journals. We extracted harms data for eight pre-specified variables and determined the completeness of reporting of harm data in each of the three sources.

RESULTS

We identified 42 RCTs evaluating 13 different drugs. Results were available on the EMA website in CSRs for 37 (88%) RCTs, ClinicalTrials.gov for 36 (86%), the European Clinical Trials Register (EUCTR) for 20 (48%) and in journal publications for 32 (76%). Harms reporting was more complete in CSRs than other sources. We identified marked discrepancies in harms data between sources, e.g. the number of patients discontinuing due to adverse events differed in CSRs and clinical trial registers for 88% of trials with data in both sources. For CSRs and publications, the corresponding number was 90%. The median (interquartile range) delay between the primary trial completion date and access to results was 4.34 (3.09-7.22) years for CSRs, 2.94 (1.16-4.52) years for ClinicalTrials.gov, 5.39 (4.18-7.33) years for EUCTR and 2.15 (0.64-5.04) years for publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Harms of recently approved oncological drugs were reported more frequently and in more detail in CSRs than in trial registries and journal publications. Systematic reviews seeking to address harms of oncological treatments should ideally use CSRs as the primary source of data; however, due to problems with access, this is currently not feasible.

Cediranib in addition to chemotherapy for women with relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (ICON6): overall survival results of a phase III randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Cediranib, an oral anti-angiogenic VEGFR 1-3 inhibitor, was studied at a daily dose of 20 mg in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy and as maintenance in a randomised trial in patients with first relapse of 'platinum-sensitive' ovarian cancer and has been shown to improve progression-free survival (PFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ICON6 (NCT00532194) was an international three-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial. Between December 2007 and December 2011, 456 women were randomised, using stratification, to receive either chemotherapy with placebo throughout (arm A, reference); chemotherapy with concurrent cediranib, followed by maintenance placebo (arm B, concurrent); or chemotherapy with concurrent cediranib, followed by maintenance cediranib (arm C, maintenance). Due to an enforced redesign of the trial in September 2011, the primary endpoint became PFS between arms A and C which we have previously published, and the overall survival (OS) was defined as a secondary endpoint, which is reported here.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 25.6 months, strong evidence of an effect of concurrent plus maintenance cediranib on PFS was observed [hazard ratio (HR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.72, P < 0.0001]. In this final update of the survival analysis, 90% of patients have died. There was a 7.4-month difference in median survival and an HR of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.67-1.11, P = 0.24) in favour of arm C. There was strong evidence of a departure from the assumption of non-proportionality using the Grambsch-Therneau test (P = 0.0031), making the HR difficult to interpret. Consequently, the restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used and the estimated difference over 6 years by the RMST was 4.8 months (95% CI: -0.09 to 9.74 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Although a statistically significant difference in time to progression was seen, the enforced curtailment in recruitment meant that the secondary analysis of OS was underpowered. The relative reduction in the risk of death of 14% risk of death was not conventionally statistically significant, but this improvement and the increase in the mean survival time in this analysis suggest that cediranib may have worthwhile activity in the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer and that further research should be undertaken.

Targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Several comparative randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed including combinations of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors since the publication of a Cochrane Review on targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in 2008. This review represents an update of that original review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of targeted therapies for clear cell mRCC in patients naïve to systemic therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search with no restrictions on language or publication status. The date of the latest search was 18 June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials, recruiting patients with clear cell mRCC naïve to previous systemic treatment. The index intervention was any TKI-based targeted therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the included studies and extracted data for the primary outcomes: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and serious adverse events (SAEs); and the secondary outcomes: health-related quality of life (QoL), response rate and minor adverse events (AEs). We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and rated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 RCTs reporting on 11,590 participants randomised across 18 comparisons. This abstract focuses on the primary outcomes of select comparisons. 1. Pazopanib versus sunitinib Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in PFS as compared to sunitinib (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.23; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 420 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 18 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 76 fewer to 38 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in OS compared to sunitinib (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.06; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 27 more OSs (95% CI 19 fewer to 70 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in SAEs as compared to sunitinib (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09; 1 study, 1102 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 734 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more participants experiencing SAEs (95% CI 44 fewer to 66 more) per 1000 participants. 2. Sunitinib versus avelumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to avelumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.80; 1 study, 886 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 130 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 209 fewer to 53 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.28, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.79; 1 study, 886 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 890 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 29 fewer OSs (95% CI 78 fewer to 8 more) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in SAEs (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.10; 1 study, 873 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 705 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more SAEs (95% CI 49 fewer to 71 more) per 1000 participants.  3. Sunitinib versus pembrolizumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.76; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 590 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 125 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 195 fewer to 56 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably reduces OS (HR 1.90, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.65; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 880 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 96 fewer OSs (95% CI 167 fewer to 40 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may reduce SAEs as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 1 study, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence) although the CI includes the possibility of no effect. Based on the control event risk of 604 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 60 fewer SAEs (95% CI 115 fewer to 12 more) per 1000 participants.  4. Sunitinib versus nivolumab and ipilimumab Sunitinib may reduce PFS as compared to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.52; 1 study, 847 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 280 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months' follow-up, this corresponds to 89 fewer PFSs (95% CI 136 fewer to 37 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib reduces OS (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.89; 1 study, 847 participants; high-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk 600 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months, this would result in 140 fewer OSs (95% CI 219 fewer to 67 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably increases SAEs (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.53; 1 study, 1082 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 457 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 169 more SAEs (95% CI 101 more to 242 more) per 1000 participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the low to high certainty of evidence, several combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors appear to be superior to single-agent targeted therapy in terms of PFS and OS, and with a favourable AE profile. Some single-agent targeted therapies demonstrated a similar or improved oncological outcome compared to others; minor differences were observed for AE within this group. The certainty of evidence was variable ranging from high to very low and all comparisons were based on single trials.

Risk of hand-foot skin reaction associated with vascular endothelial growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors: A meta-analysis of 57 randomized controlled trials involving 24,956 patients

BACKGROUND

Multiple randomized controlled trials have assessed hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) caused by vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs).

OBJECTIVE

We performed a meta-analysis to determine the incidence and the relative risk (RR) of HFSR associated with these agents.

METHODS

Databases were searched for relevant studies. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidences, RR, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using random-effects or fixed-effects models according to the heterogeneity of the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 24,956 patients from 57 studies were included. The overall incidence of all-grade and high-grade HFSR associated with VEGFR-TKIs was 35.0% (95% CI, 28.6%-41.6%) and 9.7% (95% CI, 7.3%-12.3%), respectively. The use of VEGFR-TKIs significantly increased the risk of developing all-grade (RR, 5.09; 95% CI, 3.52-7.35; P < .001) and high-grade (RR, 9.42; 95% CI, 5.59-15.90; P < .001) HFSR. Subgroup analyses revealed that the risk of HFSR was significantly increased according to tumor type, VEGFR-TKI, trial phase, treatment regimen, and control therapy. No evidence of publication bias was observed.

LIMITATION

High heterogeneity in most studies.

CONCLUSION

High risk of HFSR is prone to develop in cancer patients receiving VEGFR-TKIs.

Technology Applications: Use of Digital Health Technology to Enable Drug Development

PURPOSE

This pilot study developed and evaluated the feasibility, usability, and perceived satisfaction with an end-user mobile medical application and provider web portal. The two interfaces allowed for remote monitoring, provided daily guidance in the management of hypertension and diarrhea, and allowed for rapid management of adverse events during a clinical trial of olaparib and cediranib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

eCO (eCediranib/Olaparib) was designed for patient self-reported, real-time management of hypertension and diarrhea using remote monitoring. eCO links to a Bluetooth-enabled blood pressure (BP) monitor and transmits data to a secure provider web portal. eCO use was assessed for suitability, usability, and satisfaction after 4 weeks using a 17-item questionnaire. Metrics regarding patient-reported BP and diarrhea events were analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients enrolled in the pilot. A total of 98.2% of expected BP values were reported: 94.2% via Bluetooth and 5.8% entered manually. Twelve patients experienced 21 BP events (systolic BP > 140 and/or diastolic BP > 90 mmHg on two consecutive readings); data from cycle 1 were comparable to the study database. Thirteen patients reported diarrhea (more than one stool per 24 hours over baseline) categorized as grade 1 or 2, which was comparable to the study database. Survey analysis showed that patients had statistically significant, positive responses to the use of the eCO application. Patients indicated eCO use made them feel more involved in their care and better connected to their health care team. The only aspect of the application that did not show a statistically significant positive response was the process of reporting diarrhea.

CONCLUSION

The eCO application was designed to assist in managing acute treatment-related events most often associated with treatment discontinuation, need for drug holidays, or dose interruption. Hypertension and diarrhea events reported via eCO allowed rapid provider response and a positive overall patient experience.

Circulating biomarkers during treatment in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer receiving cediranib in the UK ABC-03 trial

BACKGROUND

Advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) has a poor prognosis. Cediranib, in addition to cisplatin/gemcitabine [CisGem], improved the response rate, but did not improve the progression-free survival (PFS) in the ABC-03 study. Minimally invasive biomarkers predictive of cediranib benefit may improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

Changes in 15 circulating plasma angiogenesis or inflammatory-related proteins and cytokeratin-18 (CK18), measured at baseline and during therapy until disease progression, were correlated with overall survival (OS) using time-varying covariate Cox models (TVC).

RESULTS

Samples were available from n = 117/124 (94%) patients. Circulating Ang1&2, FGFb, PDGFbb, VEGFC, VEGFR1 and CK18 decreased as a result of the therapy, independent of treatment with cediranib. Circulating VEGFR2 and Tie2 were preferentially reduced by cediranib. Patients with increasing levels of VEGFA at any time had a worse PFS and OS; this detrimental effect was attenuated in patients receiving cediranib. TVC analysis revealed CK18 and VEGFR2 increases correlated with poorer OS in all patients (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Rising circulating VEGFA levels in patients with ABC, treated with CisGem, are associated with worse PFS and OS, not seen in patients receiving cediranib. Rising levels of markers of tumour burden (CK18) and potential resistance (VEGFR2) are associated with worse outcomes and warrant validation.

Efficacy of targeted therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on the efficacy of the targeted therapies in the treatment of advanced RCC and, via an indirect comparison, to provide an optimal treatment among these agents. A systematic search of Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Clinical Trials unpublished was performed up to Jan 1, 2015 to identify eligible randomized trials. Outcomes of interest assessing a targeted agent included progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR). Thirty eligible randomized controlled studies, total twentyfourth trails (5110 cases and 4626 controls) were identified. Compared with placebo and IFN-α, single vascular epithelial growth factor (receptor) tyrosine kinase inhibitor and mammalian target of rapamycin agent (VEGF(r)-TKI & mTOR inhibitor) were associated with improved PFS, improved OS and higher ORR, respectively. Comparing sorafenib combination vs sorafenib, there was no significant difference with regard to PFS and OS, but with a higher ORR. Comparing single or combination VEGF(r)-TKI & mTOR inhibitor vs BEV + IFN-α, there was no significant difference with regard to PFS, OS, or ORR. Our network ITC meta-analysis also indicated a superior PFS of axitinib and everolimus compared to sorafenib. Our data suggest that targeted therapy with VEGF(r)-TKI & mTOR inhibitor is associated with superior efficacy for treating advanced RCC with improved PFS, OS and higher ORR compared to placebo and IFN-α. In summary, here we give a comprehensive overview of current targeted therapies of advanced RCC that may provide evidence for the adequate targeted therapy selecting.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Cediranib

Cediranib potently and selectively inhibits all three vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR-1, -2 and -3), and clinical studies have shown that it is effective in patients with ovarian cancer at a dose of 20 mg/day. Cediranib is absorbed moderately slowly; a high-fat meal reduced the cediranib area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) by 24% and maximum plasma concentration (C _max) by 33%. Cediranib binds to serum albumin and α1-acid glycoprotein; protein binding in human plasma is approximately 95%. The cediranib AUC and C _max increase proportionally with dose from 0.5 to 60 mg, and cediranib has linear pharmacokinetics (PK) over time. Cediranib is metabolized via flavin-containing monooxygenase 1 and 3 (FMO1, FMO3) and uridine 5'-diphospho-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A4. Cediranib and its metabolites are mainly excreted in faeces (59%), with <1% of unchanged drug being excreted in urine. The apparent oral clearance is moderate and the mean terminal half-life is 22 h. Cediranib is a substrate of multidrug resistance-1 (MDR1) protein (also known as P-glycoprotein [P-gp]). Coadministration with ketoconazole, a potent P-gp inhibitor, increases cediranib AUC at steady-state (AUC_ss) in patients by 21%, while coadministration with rifampicin, a potent inducer of P-gp, decreases cediranib AUC_ss by 39%. Administration of cediranib with chemotherapies demonstrated minimal PK impact on each other. No dose adjustment is recommended for patients with mild or moderate hepatic or renal impairment, and no dose adjustment is needed on the basis of age and body weight. A pooled analysis at doses of 0.5-60 mg showed no significant increase in QTc intervals. Increases in blood pressure and the incidence of diarrhoea were associated with increased cediranib dose and systemic exposure.

Incidence and risk of hypertension associated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in cancer patients: a comprehensive network meta-analysis of 72 randomized controlled trials involving 30013 patients

Background

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been developed during the last decade that target the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) are currently being evaluated as treatments for malignant tumors. The increased application of VEGFR-TKIs means that the probability of hypertension is a serious concern. However, the reported incidence varies markedly between clinical trials. Here, we undertook an up-to-date, comprehensive meta-analysis on clinical works to build the incidence of hypertension along with VEGFR-TKIs. The goal was to understand better of the overall venture of cancer patients’ hypertension treated with these drugs.

Methods

Databases (EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane library) and the abstracts of the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting and European Society of Medical Oncology were searched to identify related studies. 95% confidence intervals (CIs), summary incidences, and relative risk (RR) were calculated utilizing either fixed-effects models on the basis of the heterogeneity of the included studies or random-effects.

Results

Seventy-two randomized controlled trials (including 30013 patients) were involved. The total incidence of high-grade and all-grade hypertensive events along with VEGFR-TKIs was 23.0% (95% CI, 20.1–26.0%) and 4.4% (95% CI, 3.7–5.0%), respectively. The use of VEGFR-TKIs remarkably enhanced the venture of developing high-grade (RR, 4.60; 95% CI, 3.92–5.40; P < 0.001) and all-grade (RR, 3.85; 95% CI, 3.37–4.40; P < 0.001) hypertensive events. Subgroup analyses revealed that the risk of a hypertensive event varied significantly in accordance with tumor type, VEGFR-TKI, trial phase, VEGFR-TKIs-based regimen, control therapy, and chemotherapy regimen.

Conclusions

Patients with cancer that receive VEGFR-TKIs are at a remarkable venture of developing hypertension. Therefore, suitable treatment and monitoring should be introduced to avoid cardiovascular complications.

Population exposure-safety analysis of cediranib for Phase I and II studies in patients with cancer

AIMS

A multistudy analysis of cediranib, a potent, selective inhibitor of all three vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR-1, -2 and -3), was conducted to establish population exposure-safety models for the relationship of cediranib exposure to the safety endpoints, diastolic and systolic blood pressure (DBP and SBP) and diarrhoea in cancer patients. These models were applied to predict safety outcomes for different cediranib dose regimens.

METHODS

Models for hypertension and diarrhoea were constructed based on data from 10 Phase I and three Phase II studies comprising 631 cancer patients following cediranib once-daily oral dosing. Daily DBP and SBP were simultaneously characterized using indirect response models for predicted cediranib concentration-time courses, while daily diarrhoea events were modelled as ordered categorical variables with a proportional odds model with a Markov element for predicted average cediranib concentrations.

RESULTS

For 20 mg cediranib once-daily oral administration, the mean increase in DBP and SBP was predicted to be 7 (95% CI 3-13) and 8 mmHg (95% CI 3-16), respectively, while the probability of mild diarrhoea, but not the severity, was predicted to increase over time. Severe diarrhoea was predicted to be resolved rapidly upon discontinuation of cediranib treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Maximum blood pressure increase was observed within the first few days of cediranib treatment, consistent with the pharmacokinetic profile of cediranib reaching steady state in about 5 days. The probability of diarrhoea increased with cediranib concentration but was far more dependent on the status of diarrhoea predicted on the previous day.

Resistance to Targeted Therapies in Renal Cancer: The Importance of Changing the Mechanism of Action

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a complex disease characterized by mutations in several genes. Loss of function of the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumour suppressor gene is a very common finding in RCC and leads to up-regulation of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-responsive genes accountable for angiogenesis and cell growth, such as platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Binding of these proteins to their cognate tyrosine kinase receptors on endothelial cells promotes angiogenesis. Promotion of angiogenesis is in part due to the activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway. Inhibition of this pathway decreases protein translation and inhibits both angiogenesis and tumour cell proliferation. Although tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) stand as the main first-line treatment option for advanced RCC, eventually all patients will become resistant to TKIs. Resistance can be overcome by using second-line treatments with different mechanisms of action, such as inhibitors of mTOR, c-MET, programmed death 1 (PD-1) receptor, or the combination of an mTOR inhibitor (mTORi) with a TKI. In this article, we briefly review current evidence regarding mechanisms of resistance in RCC and treatment strategies to overcome resistance with a special focus on the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway.

Population pharmacokinetic and exposure simulation analysis for cediranib (AZD2171) in pooled Phase I/II studies in patients with cancer

AIMS

A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed for cediranib to simulate cediranib exposure for different doses, including comedication with strong uridine glucuronosyl transferase/P-glycoprotein inducers such as rifampicin, in cancer patients.

METHODS

Plasma concentrations and covariates from 625 cancer patients after single or multiple oral cediranib administrations ranging from 0.5 to 90 mg in 19 Phase I and II studies were included in the analysis. Stepwise covariate modelling was used to develop the population PK model. The final model was used to simulate cediranib exposure in cancer patients to evaluate cediranib target coverage and the need for dose adjustment for covariates or coadministration with rifampicin.

RESULTS

A two-compartment model with sequential zero- and first-order absorption and first-order elimination adequately described the cediranib concentration-time courses. Body weight and age were identified as having statistically significant impact on cediranib PK, but only <21% impact on AUC and maximum concentrations. Simulated lower bounds of 90% prediction interval or median of unbound cediranib concentrations after cediranib 15 or 20 mg exceeded the IC₅₀ for vascular endothelial growth factor receptors-1, -2 and -3. Exposures of cediranib 20 or 30 mg with coadministration of rifampicin were comparable to those of 15 or 20 mg, respectively, without coadministration.

CONCLUSIONS

No covariate was identified to require dose adjustment for cediranib. Cediranib exposure following 15 or 20 mg daily dose administration is adequate overall for inhibition of in vitro estimated vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1, -2 and -3 activities. An increase in cediranib dose may be needed for cediranib coadministered with strong uridine glucuronosyl transferase/P-glycoprotein inducers such as rifampicin.

Identification of target genes of cediranib in alveolar soft part sarcoma using a gene microarray

The aim of the present study was to identify the target genes of cediranib and the associated signaling pathways in alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS). A microarray dataset (GSE32569) was obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus database. The R software package was used for data normalization and screening of differentially expressed genes (DEGs). The Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery was used to perform Gene Ontology analysis. Gene Set Enrichment Analysis was performed to obtain the up- and downregulated pathways in ASPS. The Distant Regulatory Elements of co-regulated genes database was used to identify the transcription factors (TFs) that were enriched in the signaling pathways. A protein-protein interaction (PPI) network was constructed using the Search Tool for the Retrieval of Interacting Genes/Proteins database and was visualized using Cytoscape software. A total of 71 DEGs, including 59 upregulated genes and 12 downregulated genes, were identified. Gene sets associated with ASPS were enriched primarily in four signaling pathways: The phenylalanine metabolism pathway, the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway, the taste transduction pathway and the intestinal immune network for the production of immunoglobulin A. Furthermore, 107 TFs were identified to be enriched in the MAPK signaling pathway. Certain genes, including those coding for Fms-like tyrosine kinase 1, kinase insert domain receptor, E-selectin and platelet-derived growth factor receptor D, that were associated with other genes in the PPI network, were identified. The present study identified certain potential target genes and the associated signaling pathways of cediranib action in ASPS, which may be helpful in understanding the efficacy of cediranib and the development of new targets for cediranib.

Pharmacokinetic Aspects of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Scientists have identified the impact of angiogenesis on tumor growth and survival. Among other efficient drugs, several small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) have been developed and have already been integrated into the treatment of various advanced malignancies. This review provides a compilation of current knowledge on the pharmacokinetic aspects of all VEGFR-TKIs already approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and of those still under investigation. Additional information on substance metabolism, potential for drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and the need for dose adaptation in patients with predominant renal and/or hepatic impairment has been included. All TKIs introduced in this review were administered orally, allowing for easy drug handling for healthcare professionals and patients. For almost all substances, the maximum plasma concentrations were reached within a short period of time. The majority of the substances showed a high plasma protein binding and their excretion occurred via the feces and, to a lesser extent, via the urine. In most cases, dose adaptation in patients with mild to moderate renal or hepatic impairment is not recommended. Cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 was found to play a crucial role in the drug metabolic processes of many compounds. In order to prevent unwanted DDIs, co-administration of VEGFR TKIs together with CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers should be avoided. Throughout all TKIs, the data indicate high inter-individual variability. The causes of this are still unclear and require further research to allow for individualization of treatment regimens.

First-line therapy for treatment-naive patients with advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review of published randomized controlled trials

In the recent years, a number of targeted therapies have been approved for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. A systematic review was conducted to assess the clinical efficacy, safety and effect of all first-line treatments evaluated to date on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A systematic search of Embase, Cochrane and MEDLINE databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (1980-2015) evaluating any targeted therapy/immunotherapy against placebo or any other targeted intervention/immunotherapy in treatment-naive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Conference proceedings from major cancer congresses (2007-2015) were handsearched. Sixteen randomized controlled trials were identified, mostly phase III. Overall, targeted therapies were associated with either improved [sunitinib, bevacizumab+interferon α (IFNα) and temsirolimus] or comparable (sorafenib) progression-free survival (PFS) versus IFNα monotherapy. Sunitinib demonstrated comparable PFS and overall survival to pazopanib, comparable PFS to sorafenib and shorter PFS compared with bevacizumab+IFNα (although no conclusions were made with regard to superiority/inferiority). Compared with sorafenib, tivozanib demonstrated a significantly longer PFS, and both tivozanib and axitinib demonstrated higher response rates. Nintedanib demonstrated comparable PFS and overall survival to sunitinib in a phase II trial. Temsirolimus, sunitinib and sorafenib treatment led to better HRQoL versus IFNα; pazopanib was associated with better HRQoL versus sunitinib. No direct meta-analyses or indirect treatment comparison analysis were undertaken because of noncomparability of the trials. In general, targeted therapies demonstrated favourable clinical efficacy and improved HRQoL compared with IFNα monotherapy. The newer therapies, tivozanib and axitinib (but not nintedanib), appeared to exhibit greater clinical benefit (response rate) than older tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

A randomized, double-blind phase II study evaluating cediranib versus cediranib and saracatinib in patients with relapsed metastatic clear-cell renal cancer (COSAK)

BACKGROUND

Preclinical work suggests SRC proteins have a role in the development of resistance to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeted therapy in metastatic clear-cell renal cancer (mRCC). This hypothesis was tested in this trial using the SRC inhibitor saracatinib and the VEGF inhibitor cediranib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with disease progression after ≥1 VEGF-targeted therapy were eligible to participate in this double-blind, randomized (1:1) phase II study. The study compared the combination cediranib 30 mg once daily (o.d.) and saracatinib 175 mg o.d. (CS) (n = 69) or cediranib 45 mg o.d. and placebo o.d. (C) (n = 69). Archived tissue was used for biomarker analysis [SRC, focal adhesion kinase (FAK), von Hippel-Lindau, protein tyrosine phosphatase 1b and hypoxia-inducible factor 2α : n = 86]. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2012, 138 patients were randomized across 16 UK sites. The characteristics of the two groups were well balanced. Partial responses were seen in 13.0% for C and 14.5% for CS (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in PFS [5.4 months (3.6-7.3 months) for C and 3.9 (2.4-5.3 months) for CS; hazard ratio (HR) 1.18 (0.94-1.48)] or overall survival (OS) [14.2 months (11.2-16.8 months) for C and 10.0 (6.7-13.2 months) for CS; HR 1.28 (1.00-1.63)]. There was no significant difference in the frequency of key adverse events, dose reductions or drug discontinuations. None of the biomarkers were prognostic for PFS or OS. FAK overexpression correlated with an OS benefit [HR 2.29 (1.09-4.82), P > 0.05], but not PFS, for CS.

CONCLUSIONS

Saracatinib did not increase the efficacy of a VEGF-targeted therapy (cediranib) in this setting. Biomarker analysis did not identify consistent predictive biomarkers.

CLINICALTRIALSGOV

NCT00942877.

Hypertension in cancer patients treated with anti-angiogenic based regimens

New anti-cancer drugs that inhibit the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling pathway are highly effective in the treatment of solid tumors, however concerns remain regarding their cardiovascular safety. The most common side effect of VEGF signaling pathway (VSP) inhibition is the development of systemic hypertension. We review the incidence, possible mechanisms, significance and management of hypertension in patients treated with VSP inhibitors.

Meta-analysis of regression of advanced solid tumors in patients receiving placebo or no anti-cancer therapy in prospective trials

BACKGROUND

A meta-analysis of prospective trials systematically investigated regression of advanced solid tumors in patients receiving placebo or no anticancer therapy to inform on spontaneous regressions.

PATIENT AND METHODS

Arms of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of metastatic solid tumors receiving placebo or no anti-cancer therapy were used. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the overall response rate (ORR) and to detect differentials based on histology, progression at baseline and prior therapies.

RESULTS

A total of 7676 patients were evaluable from 61 RCTs evaluating 18 solid tumors. The ORR was 1.95% (95% CI: 1.52-2.48%). There was no significant effect of histology (p=0.110), baseline progressive disease (p>0.20) or the line of therapy (p>0.20) on ORR.

CONCLUSIONS

Spontaneous regressions are seen across all advanced solid tumors. Some malignancies demonstrated higher rates of spontaneous regressions and may be relatively immunotherapy responsive.

Congestive heart failure risk in cancer patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 36 clinical trials

AIMS

Congestive heart failure (CHF) associated with vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) has emerged as a relevant problem in clinical and scientific communities. We performed an up-to-date, comprehensive meta-analysis to determine the overall incidence and risk of CHF in cancer patients receiving VEGFR-TKIs.

METHODS

The databases of PubMed, Web of Science and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology up to August 31 2013 were searched for relevant articles. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random effects or fixed effect models according to the heterogeneity of included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 10 553 patients from 36 clinical trials were included. The overall incidence of all grade and high grade CHF associated with VEGFR-TKIs was 3.2% (95% CI 1.8%, 5.8%) and 1.4% (95% CI 0.9%, 2.3%), respectively. The use of VEGFR-TKIs significantly increased the risk of developing all grade (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.76, 3.20, P < 0.001) and high grade (OR 3.51, 95% CI 1.74, 7.05, P < 0.001) CHF. In subgroup analyses, the risk of CHF did not significantly vary with tumour types (P = 0.071 for all grade; P = 0.72 for high grade) and VEGFR-TKIs (P = 0.55 for all grade; P = 0.99 for high grade). Meta-regression indicated that CHF might possibly occur early in the treatment of VEGFR-TKIs. No evidence of publication bias was observed.

CONCLUSION

The use of VEGFR-TKIs is associated with a significantly increased risk of developing congestive heart failure in cancer patients. Clinicians should be aware of this risk and provide close monitoring in patients receiving these therapies.

Targeted therapies for treatment of renal cell carcinoma: recent advances and future perspectives

PURPOSE

A wide variety of targeted therapies are available for the treatment of renal cancer that has progressed beyond the point at which surgery is a viable option. In addition, there are many more that are in the different stages of clinical trials. Here, we provide a methodical discussion of the efficacy and safety of targeted therapies for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature employing the search terms: renal cell carcinoma targets, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, and each of the drugs discussed within these papers.

RESULTS

The identified targeted therapies work by disrupting specific signalling pathways involved in tumour progression, such as those responsible for angiogenesis and cell proliferation. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors are now established classes of drugs used in the treatment of renal cancer, with a total of six having received regulatory approval to date (sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, axitinib, temsirolimus, and everolimus). Ongoing trials are likely to result in addition to these in the near future, for example, tivozanib, dovitinib, and cediranib. Furthermore, in addition to these small molecule drugs, immunotherapies involving monoclonal antibodies against signalling molecules such as vascular endothelial growth factor (bevacizumab) or programmed death-1 (nivolumab) are receiving increasing attention.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted therapies have great potential for disrupting tumour progression by inhibiting certain signalling pathways. As our understanding of the biochemical pathways involved in cancer progresses, additional targets are certain to become apparent, expanding treatment options even further.

Receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors: Are they real tumor killers?

Inhibiting tumor growth by targeting the tumor vasculature was first proposed by Judah Folkman almost 40 years ago. Since then, different approaches and numerous drugs and agents have been developed to achieve this goal, either with the aim of inhibiting tumor neoangiogenesis or normalizing the tumor vasculature. Among the most promising therapeutic targets are receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), some of which are predominantly expressed on tumor endothelial cells, although they are sometimes also present on tumor cells. The majority of RTK inhibitors investigated over the past two decades competes with ATP at the active site of the kinase and therefore block the phosphorylation of intracellular targets. Some of these drugs have been approved for therapy, whereas others are still in clinical trials. Here, we discuss the scientific basis, current status, problems and future prospects of RTK inhibition in anti-tumor therapy.

Targeted Therapy for Metastatic Renal Carcinoma: an Update

Conventional chemotherapy is associated with poor outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Advances in the understanding of tumor molecular biology and the implementation of new drugs that target these molecular pathways have increased the arsenal against advanced RCC and improved outcomes in these patients. Herein, we briefly describe the latest data on targeted therapies used in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. Search strategy was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Abstracts of relevant studies published in PubMed between 2000 and 2014 were analyzed by two authors. Abstracts were selected if they were published in English, data reported was of phase II or III clinical trials, and outcomes followed FDA approval. If consensus between the two authors was achieved, they were included in the review. Key words used were “target therapy” and “metastatic renal cell carcinoma”. The results of the studies analyzed in this review support the benefits of targeted therapy in metastatic RCC. These include improved progression-free survival, overall survival, and quality of life as well as reduced toxicities compared to immunotherapy. The improvement in outcomes in metastatic RCC makes these drugs a preferred option as a primary treatment for these patients.

A randomized phase II study of cediranib alone versus cediranib in combination with dasatinib in docetaxel resistant, castration resistant prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Activation of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and the oncogenic Src pathway has been implicated in the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in preclinical models. Cediranib and dasatinib are multi-kinase inhibitors targeting VEGFR and Src respectively. Phase II studies of cediranib and dasatinib in CRPC have shown single agent activity.

METHODS

Docetaxel-pretreated CRPC patients were randomized to arm A: cediranib alone (20 mg/day) versus arm B: cediranib (20 mg/day) plus dasatinib (100 mg/day) given orally on 4-week cycles. Primary endpoint was 12-week progression-free survival (PFS) as per the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2). Patient reported outcomes were evaluated using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Present Pain Intensity (PPI) scales. Correlative studies of bone turnover markers (BTM), including bone alkaline phosphate (BAP) and serum beta-C telopeptide (B-CTx) were serially assayed. Results A total of 22 patients, 11 per arm, were enrolled. Baseline demographics were similar in both arms. Median number of cycles =4 in arm A (range 1-12) and 2 in arm B (range 1-9). Twelve-week PFS was 73 % in arm A versus 18 % in arm B (p = 0.03). Median PFS in months (arm A versus B) was: 5.2 versus 2.6 (95 % CI: 1.9-6.5 versus 1.4-not reached). Most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension, anemia and thrombocytopenia in arm A and hypertension, diarrhea and fatigue in arm B. One treatment-related death (retroperitoneal hemorrhage) was seen in arm A. FACT-P and PPI scores did not significantly change in either arm. No correlation between BTM and PFS was seen in either arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Although limited by small numbers, this randomized study showed that the combination of VEGFR and Src targeted therapy did not result in improved efficacy and may be associated with a worse outcome than VEGFR targeted therapy alone in patients with CRPC. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01260688.

Lessons learned from adult clinical experience to inform evaluations of VEGF pathway inhibitors in children with cancer

Agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway have been studied in adults with cancer for nearly two decades. It is important to assess the lessons learned from this adult experience and to see how these lessons can help inform pediatric development of agents in this class. The benefit achieved from the use of VEGF pathway targeted agents for adult cancers has primarily been to delay for several months disease progression and less commonly time to death for conditions in which cure is not a reasonable expectation. VEGF pathway targeted agents have shown no efficacy when applied in the adjuvant setting. For adults with advanced cancer, prolongation of survival by 2-3 months is considered an important achievement in some settings. However, the primary goal of pediatric oncology clinical research is to identify treatments that allow children to be cured of their cancer and to grow to adulthood without treatment-induced limitations that lower their quality of survival. An important question for the pediatric oncology research community, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory agencies to address in planning for future clinical trials is whether existing data support a role for VEGF pathway targeted agents in contributing to a therapeutic pathway to cure for children with cancer.

Tivozanib for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma: results and implications of the TIVO-1 trial

ABSTRACT 

Multiple VEGF and mTOR inhibitors have provided improvements in median progression-free survival for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Tivozanib is a potent and specific VEGFR-1, -2 and -3 tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Promising results led to the TIVO-I Phase III trial (n = 517) comparing tivozanib with sorafenib in patients who were either untreated or had received cytokines. This study met its primary end point by statistically significantly improving progression-free survival, but did impair overall survival, a secondary end point. Crossover from sorafenib to tivozanib may have confounded survival. Because of that detrimental survival, the US FDA rejected approval in May 2013, leading to interruption in its development for renal cell carcinoma.

Risk of cardiovascular toxicities in patients with solid tumors treated with sunitinib, axitinib, cediranib or regorafenib: an updated systematic review and comparative meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We performed a systematic review and comparative meta-analysis of cardiovascular toxicities associated with sunitinib, axitinib, cediranib or regorafenib; oral multi tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible studies included randomized phase II and III trials of patients with solid tumors on sunitinib, axitinib, cediranib or regorafenib describing daily events of hypertension, left ventricular dysfunction, bleeding or thrombosis.

RESULTS

Patients treated with these four agents had a significantly increased risk of all-grade hypertension and bleeding. The RR of all-grade hypertension, bleeding, thrombosis and cardiac dysfunction were 2.78 (95% CI 2.03-3.81; p<0.00001), 1.93 (95% CI 1.41-2.64; p<0.00001), 0.85 (95% CI 0.60-1.19; p=0.50), 2.36 (95% CI 0.95-5.87; p=0.06), respectively. Exploratory subgroup analysis showed no effect of the agent used (sunitinib vs. axitinib vs. cediranib) in the risk of hypertension; while for bleeding, only the sunitinib subgroup RR was significant compared to axitinib or cediranib.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis has demonstrated that sunitinib, axitinib, cediranib and regorafenib are associated with a higher risk of developing all grade and high grade hypertension compared with control. While for bleeding, only the sunitinib subgroup RR was significant compared to axitinib or cediranib. Clinicians should be aware of these risks and perform regular cardiovascular monitoring.

Indirect comparisons of efficacy and safety between seven newer targeted agents for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety among 7 newer targeted agents for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). All randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of targeted therapeutic drugs for mRCC were included. The study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. The analysis evaluated efficacy outcomes [improvement in the median progression-free survival (PFS)] and safety outcomes (number of withdrawals due to adverse events). The network analysis included direct and indirect analyses. The quality of the selected studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method. We identified 7 articles eligible for inclusion in the study. The direct comparison of the targeted agents indicated better efficacy in terms of longer PFS, but worse safety (more withdrawals due to adverse events). The indirect analysis demonstrated that axitinib was significantly more effective compared to panzopanib; sunitinib was superior to sorafenib and temsirolimus regarding efficacy outcome, without any statistically significant difference in the safety outcome. The results of the quality assessment indicated moderate scores using the GRADE method. In conclusion, the result of this network analysis suggested that sunitinib and axitinib may be more clinically efficient and axitinib is associated with a lower risk of adverse events compared to sorafenib, pazopanib and temsirolimus.

Oral anticancer drugs: how limited dosing options and dose reductions may affect outcomes in comparative trials and efficacy in patients

Historically, cancer medicine has avoided the problem of unequal dosing by comparing maximum-tolerated doses of intravenous regimens with proportionate dose reductions for toxicity. However, in recent years, with the development of numerous oral anticancer agents, dosing options are arbitrarily and increasingly limited by the size of pills. We contend that an underappreciated consequence of pill size is unequal dosing in comparative clinical trials and that this can have an impact on outcomes. We discuss how comparative effectiveness trials can be unbalanced and how the use of doses that are not sustainable might affect outcomes, especially marginal ones. We further argue that because of their poor tolerability and their limited dosing options, which often result in large dose adjustments in response to toxicity, the real-world clinical effectiveness of oral anticancer agents may be diminished and may not emulate results achieved in registration trials.

Phase II study of cediranib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors or soft-tissue sarcoma

PURPOSE

Cediranib is a potent VEGF signaling inhibitor with activity against all three VEGF receptors and KIT. This phase II study evaluated the antitumor activity of cediranib in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) resistant/intolerant to imatinib, or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas (STS; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00385203).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients received cediranib 45 mg/day. Primary objective was to determine the antitumor activity of cediranib according to changes in 2[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography ((18)FDG-PET) tumor uptake in patients with GIST using maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax). Secondary objectives included objective tumor response and tolerability in patients with GIST/STS.

RESULTS

Thirty-four of 36 enrolled patients were treated (GIST n = 24; STS n = 10). At day 29, five patients had confirmed decreases in SUVmax (≥10% from day 8) and two had confirmed partial metabolic responses (≥25% decrease), but arithmetic mean percentage changes in SUVmax, averaged across the cohort, were not significant at day 8 [6.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 19.95-33.54) or day 29 (4.6%; 95% CI, 8.05-17.34). Eleven patients with GIST achieved a best objective tumor response of stable disease; eight achieved stable disease ≥16 weeks. In patients with STS, four of six with alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS) achieved confirmed and durable partial responses. The commonest adverse events were diarrhea (85%), fatigue (74%), and hypertension (68%).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients progressing on imatinib/sunitinib, cediranib 45 mg/day demonstrated evidence of activity by (18)FDG-PET, but did not reduce average SUVmax. Evidence of antitumor activity was seen in ASPS.

Risks of proteinuria associated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) have emerged as an effective targeted therapy in the treatment of cancer patients, the overall incidence and risk of proteinuria associated these drugs is unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published clinical trials to quantify the incidence and risk of proteinuria associated with VEGFR-TKIs.

METHODOLOGY

Databases from PubMed, Web of Science and abstracts presented at ASCO meeting up to May 31, 2013 were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective phase II and III trials evaluating VEGFR-TKIs in cancer patients with adequate data on proteinuria. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random effects or fixed effect models according to the heterogeneity of included studies.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

A total of 6,882 patients with a variety of solid tumors from 33 clinical trials were included in our analysis. The incidence of all-grade and high-grade (grade 3 or higher) proteinuria was 18.7% (95% CI, 13.3%-25.6%) and 2.4% (95% CI, 1.6%-3.7%), respectively. Patients treated with VEGFR-TKIs had a significantly increased risk of all-grade (OR 2.92, 95%CI: 1.09-7.82, p = 0.033) and high-grade proteinuria (OR 1.97, 95%CI: 1.01-3.84, p = 0.046) when compared to patients treated with control medication. No evidence of publication bias was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of VEGFR-TKIs is associated with a significant increased risk of developing proteinuria. Physicians should be aware of this adverse effect and should monitor cancer patients receiving VEGFR-TKIs.

Novel approaches targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor axis in renal cell carcinoma

In recent years, functional characterization of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor, hypoxia-induced factors, and one of their key downstream effectors, the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), has revolutionized treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. Therapeutic strategies targeting the ligand itself (VEGF-A) or its receptor (VEGFR2) have proven successful. However, complete remissions are rare, and with time patients invariably suffer disease progression. It is understood that this is due to incomplete suppression of VEGF signaling and/or adaptive up-regulation of non-VEGF-dependent tumor-promoting stimuli. In this article, we review novel VEGF-directed agents that are being developed to address the shortcomings of current targeted drugs for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. Building on our current understanding of molecular mechanisms behind resistance, examples include next-generation multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitors, biologics, and other compounds.

A phase II study of cediranib as palliative treatment in patients with symptomatic malignant ascites or pleural effusion

Malignant ascites and pleural effusion are challenging clinical problems, with a major impact on quality of life. We conducted a randomized phase II trial to assess the palliative value of cediranib, an oral vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGF TKI). After a baseline paracentesis or thoracentesis (on day 0), patients with symptomatic malignant ascites and/or pleural effusion were randomized between immediate treatment with cediranib (Immediate Cediranib) or delayed treatment with cediranib (Delayed Cediranib) on day 29, or after a new puncture was needed. The primary objective of the study was the puncture-free survival, defined as the time from study start (day 1) to the first need for paracentesis or thoracentesis, or time to death, whichever event occurred first. Twelve patients were enrolled. The median puncture-free survival was 45 days (range 10-368) in the Immediate Cediranib patients and 7 days (range 4-13) in the Delayed Cediranib patients (P = 0.011). The change in puncture-free interval (the puncture-free survival after study start minus the puncture-free interval before study start) increased with a median of 31 days in the Immediate Cediranib patients and shortened with a median of 3 days in the Delayed Cediranib patients (P = 0.015). The most common adverse events were fatigue and anorexia. In conclusion, cediranib increased the puncture-free survival and puncture-free interval with an acceptable toxicity profile. This is the first study in which an oral VEGFR TKI showed beneficial palliative effects in patients with malignant effusions.