NICE guidance on pazopanib for first-line treatment of advanced renal-cell carcinoma

Causal analyses with target trial emulation for real-world evidence removed large self-inflicted biases: systematic bias assessment of ovarian cancer treatment effectiveness

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Drawing causal conclusions from real-world data (RWD) poses methodological challenges and risk of bias. We aimed to systematically assess the type and impact of potential biases that may occur when analyzing RWD using the case of progressive ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared overall survival with and without second-line chemotherapy (LOT2) using electronic medical records. Potential biases were determined using directed acyclic graphs. We followed a stepwise analytic approach ranging from crude analysis and multivariable-adjusted Cox model up to a full causal analysis using a marginal structural Cox model with replicates emulating a reference randomized controlled trial (RCT). To assess biases, we compared effect estimates (hazard ratios [HRs]) of each approach to the HR of the reference trial.

RESULTS

The reference trial showed an HR for second line vs. delayed therapy of 1.01 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.82-1.25). The corresponding HRs from the RWD analysis ranged from 0.51 for simple baseline adjustments to 1.41 (95% CI: 1.22-1.64) accounting for immortal time bias with time-varying covariates. Causal trial emulation yielded an HR of 1.12 (95% CI: 0.96-1.28).

CONCLUSION

Our study, using ovarian cancer as an example, shows the importance of a thorough causal design and analysis if one is expecting RWD to emulate clinical trial results.

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.

Sequential targeted therapy after pazopanib therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer: efficacy and toxicity

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in whom first-line therapies have failed might derive clinical benefit with sequential targeted agents. Limited data are available on the efficacy and toxicity of subsequent therapies after disease progression during pazopanib therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mRCC who received subsequent systemic treatment after pazopanib treatment failure were identified across 7 institutions. Pazopanib was given as first-line therapy in 28 patients and after cytokines therapy in 7 patients. Clinical outcome and toxicity analyses of 2 sequential treatment options (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor [mTORi]) is presented.

RESULTS

Subsequent therapy was anti-VEGF in 22 patients and mTORi in 13. One patient who received bevacizumab and temsirolimus combination was excluded. VEGF-targeted therapies included sorafenib (n = 10), sunitinib (n = 3), bevacizumab (n = 2), cediranib (n = 4) and cabozantinib (n = 3). Patients treated with mTORi received everolimus. Median progression-free survival was 5.6 months from the start of subsequent therapy with anti-VEGF and 2.4 months with mTORi (P = .009). Overall survival (OS) was not significantly different (P = .68). Clinical benefit (including partial response and stable disease) on subsequent therapy was observed in 15 patients (64%) and 4 patients (31%) of anti-VEGF- and everolimus-treated patients, respectively (P = .021).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, targeting VEGF was an effective strategy after disease progression during pazopanib treatment, although OS was not different among patients treated with VEGF or mTORi.