Phase II trial of second-line everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RECORD-4)

Methuosis Inducer SGI-1027 Cooperates with Everolimus to Promote Apoptosis and Pyroptosis by Triggering Lysosomal Membrane Permeability in Renal Cancer

The mTOR inhibitor everolimus has been approved as a sequential or second-line therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, the development of drug resistance limits its clinical applications. This study aims to address the challenge of everolimus resistance and provide new insights into the treatment of advanced RCC. Here, the cytotoxicity of the DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) inhibitor SGI-1027 in inducing cell vacuolation and methuosis is discovered and demonstrated for the first time. Additionally, SGI-1027 exerts synergistic effects with everolimus, as their combination suppresses the growth, migration, and invasion of renal cancer cells. Mechanistically, apoptosis and GSDME-dependent pyroptosis triggered by lysosomal membrane permeability (LMP) are observed. The upregulation of GSDME expression and increased lysosomal activity in renal cancer cells provide a therapeutic window for the combination of these two drugs to treat renal cancer. The combination treatment exhibits effective anti-tumor activity and is well tolerated in a subcutaneous tumor model. Overall, this study validates and reveals the specific cytotoxicity property of SGI-1027 and its potent synergistic effect with everolimus, offering new insights into advanced RCC therapy and everolimus-resistance overcoming.

Adverse renal outcomes following targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: To clarify the prevalence of adverse renal outcomes following targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Library. Studies that had reported adverse renal outcomes following targeted therapies in RCC were eligible. Outcomes included adverse renal outcomes defined as either renal dysfunction as evidenced by elevated serum creatinine levels or the diagnosis of acute kidney injury, or proteinuria as indicated by abnormal urine findings. The risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane handbook guidelines. Publication bias was assessed using Funnel plot analysis and Egger Test. Results: The occurrences of the examined outcomes, along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were combined using a random-effects model. In all, 23 studies including 10 RCTs and 13 observational cohort studies were included. The pooled incidence of renal dysfunction and proteinuria following targeted therapies in RCC were 17% (95% CI: 12%-22%; I2 = 88.5%, p < 0.01) and 29% (95% CI: 21%-38%; I2 = 93.2%, p < 0.01), respectively. The pooled incidence of both types of adverse events varied substantially across different regimens. Occurrence is more often in polytherapy compared to monotherapy. The majority of adverse events were rated as CTCAE grades 1 or 2 events. Four studies were assessed as having low risk of bias. Conclusion: Adverse renal outcomes reflected by renal dysfunction and proteinuria following targeted therapies in RCC are not uncommon and are more often observed in polytherapy compared to monotherapy. The majority of the adverse events were of mild severity. Systematic Review Registration: Identifier CRD42023441979.

PDZ-binding kinase aggravates pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm progression by activating the AKT/mTOR pathway

The therapeutic effects of existing drug regimens against pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNENs) remain limited, and identifying ideal therapeutic targets is warranted. PDZ binding kinase (PBK) may play an oncogenic role in most solid tumors. However, its function in pNEN remains unclear. In this study, pNEN samples and International Cancer Genome Consortium data were used to determine the clinical significance of PBK. Cell counting and CCK8 assays were used to assess cell proliferation. Flow cytometry was used to assess drug-induced apoptosis and cell cycle arrest. An in vivo PBK-targeting experiment was performed in mice bearing pNENs. Western blotting, quantitative PCR, and immunohistochemistry were performed to assess the molecular mechanisms. PBK was significantly upregulated in pNEN tissues compared with paracancerous tissues. Additionally, PBK was a poor prognostic factor for pNEN patients. PBK was found to promote the proliferation of pNEN cells by activating the AKT/mTOR pathway. Furthermore, PBK inhibition combined with everolimus treatment had enhanced antitumour effects on pNEN via inhibiting AKT/mTOR pathway and inducing G0/G1 phase cell cycle arrest. This study highlights that PBK plays an oncogenic role in and is a promising therapeutic target for pNEN.

Efficacy and safety of vorolanib plus everolimus in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A three-arm, randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase III study (CONCEPT)

BACKGROUND

Vorolanib is a highly potent tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and platelet-derived growth factor receptor. This three-arm, randomised, registered study aimed to assess the combination of vorolanib and everolimus or vorolanib alone versus a control arm of everolimus as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with advanced or metastatic RCC who had received one prior VEGFR-TKI were randomised (1:1:1) to receive the combination of vorolanib and everolimus or either monotherapy. Patients with brain metastases were excluded. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by the independent review committee per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.1.

RESULTS

Between 10th March 2017 and 30th May 2019, 399 patients (133 in each group) were enrolled. By the cutoff date (30th April 2020), a significant improvement in PFS was detected in the combination group compared with the everolimus group (10.0 versus 6.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; P = 0.0171). PFS was similar between the vorolanib group and the everolimus group (median: 6.4 versus 6.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.94; P = 0.6856). A significantly higher objective response rate was observed in the combination group than in the everolimus group (24.8% versus 8.3%; P = 0.0003), whereas there was no significant difference between the vorolanib group and the everolimus group (10.5% versus 8.3%; P = 0.5278). The overall survival data were immature. A total of 96 (72.2%), 52 (39.1%) and 71 (53.4%) grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in the combination group, vorolanib group and everolimus group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of vorolanib to everolimus as 2nd-line treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic RCC who have experienced cancer progression after VEGFR-TKI therapy provided a better objective response rate and PFS than everolimus alone with a manageable safety profile.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03095040; Chinadrugtrials, CTR20160987.

Thrombospondin-2 and LDH Are Putative Predictive Biomarkers for Treatment with Everolimus in Second-Line Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (MARC-2 Study)

Simple Summary

Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) remains a challenge due to the lack of biomarkers indicating the optimal drug for each patient. This study analyzed blood samples of patients with predominant clear cell mRCC who were treated with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus after failure of one prior tumor therapy. In an exploratory approach, predictive blood biomarkers were searched. We found lower levels of the protein thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2) at the start of the therapy and higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in serum two weeks after therapy initiation to be associated with therapy response. Of note, these blood biomarkers had a higher predictive value than baseline patient parameters or risk classifications. Polymorphisms in the mTOR gene appeared to be associated with therapy response, but were not significant. To conclude, it seems feasible to identify patients showing longtime responses to everolimus and possible to increase tumor therapy response rates based on biomarkers for individual therapy selection.

Abstract

There is an unmet need for predictive biomarkers in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) therapy. The phase IV MARC-2 trial searched for predictive blood biomarkers in patients with predominant clear cell mRCC who benefit from second-line treatment with everolimus. In an exploratory approach, potential biomarkers were assessed employing proteomics, ELISA, and polymorphism analyses. Lower levels of angiogenesis-related protein thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2) at baseline (≤665 parts per billion, ppb) identified therapy responders with longer median progression-free survival (PFS; ≤665 ppb at baseline: 6.9 months vs. 1.8, p = 0.005). Responders had higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in serum two weeks after therapy initiation (>27.14 nmol/L), associated with a longer median PFS (3.8 months vs. 2.2, p = 0.013) and improved overall survival (OS; 31.0 months vs. 14.0 months, p < 0.001). Baseline TSP-2 levels had a stronger relation to PFS (HR 0.36, p = 0.008) than baseline patient parameters, including IMDC score. Increased serum LDH levels two weeks after therapy initiation were the best predictor for OS (HR 0.21, p < 0.001). mTOR polymorphisms appeared to be associated with therapy response but were not significant. Hence, we identified TSP-2 and LDH as promising predictive biomarkers for therapy response on everolimus after failure of one VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with clear cell mRCC.

Everolimus after failure of one prior VEGF-targeted therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Final results of the MARC-2 trial

MARC-2, a prospective, multicenter phase IV trial, aimed to investigate clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with everolimus after failure of one initial vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFR-TKI) therapy and to identify subgroups benefiting most, based on clinical characteristics and biomarkers. Patients with clear cell mRCC failing one initial VEGFR-TKI received everolimus until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (6moPFS). Secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), PFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. Between 2011 and 2015, 63 patients were enrolled. Median age was 65.4 years (range 43.3-81.1). 6moPFS was 39.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27.0-51.3) overall, 54.4% (95% CI, 35.2-70.1) vs 23.7% (95% CI, 10.5-39.9) for patients aged ≥65 vs <65 years and 51.4% (95% CI, 34.7-65.7) vs 18.2% (95% CI, 5.7-36.3) for patients with body mass index (BMI) >25 vs ≤25 kg/m² . A Cox proportional hazards model confirmed a longer PFS for patients aged ≥65 years (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.80) and a longer OS for patients with BMI >25 kg/m² (HR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18-0.71). Median PFS and median OS were 3.8 months (95% CI, 3.2-6.2) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.3-24.3). ORR was 7.9% and disease control rate was 60.3%. No new safety signals emerged. Most common adverse events were stomatitis (31.7%), fatigue (31.7%), and anemia (30.2%). One patient died from treatment-related upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Everolimus remains a safe and effective treatment option for mRCC patients after one prior VEGFR-TKI therapy. Patients aged ≥65 years and patients with BMI >25 kg/m² benefited most.

Phase 1 trial of vorolanib (CM082) in combination with everolimus in patients with advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma

Background

Vorolanib (X-82, CM082) is a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor. This study aimed to evaluate the tolerability, safety, pharmacokinetics and antitumor activities of vorolanib plus everolimus (an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin).

Methods

Patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced RCC and failed with standard therapy were eligible for this study. Dose-escalated combinations of vorolanib (100, 150 or 200 mg once daily) with everolimus (5 mg once daily) were administered on 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity using a conventional 3 + 3 dose-escalation design.

Findings

22 patients (100 mg n = 4, 150 mg n = 3, 200 mg n = 15) were enrolled. Only one patient experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT, grade 4 thrombocytopenia) in the vorolanib 200 mg combination cohort, and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not reached. The most common treatment-related adverse events were proteinuria (100%), leukopenia (77%), hypercholesterolaemia (77%), increased low-density lipoprotein (68%), hypertriglyceridaemia (64%), hyperglycaemia (59%), and fatigue (55%). Most treatment-related adverse events were grade 1 to 2, with grade 3 or higher toxicities mostly seen in the 200 mg cohort. Single dosing of vorolanib demonstrated dose-proportional increases in the C_max and AUC, and observed short t_1/2z ranging from 4.74±1.44 to 12.89±7.49 h. The pharmacokinetic parameters for everolimus were similar among all cohorts. Of 19 evaluable patients, the ORR and DCR was 32% (n = 6, 95% CI, 13–57%) and 100% (95% CI, 82–100%), respectively.

Interpretation

Combination therapy of vorolanib 200 mg plus everolimus 5 mg once daily is potentially effective with potential activity. Further evaluation of the combination in advanced RCC patients is ongoing (NCT03095040).

Funding

Betta Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China.

A Phase 4 Study of Everolimus to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety in Patients with Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma after Failure of First-Line Sunitinib or Pazopanib (SUNPAZ)

INTRODUCTION

Sunitinib and pazopanib are both standard first-line therapies for clear-cell metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC). Everolimus is a well-established second-line treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the efficacy and safety of second-line everolimus following pazopanib or sunitinib.

METHODS

SUNPAZ was an open-label, phase 4 clinical trial of everolimus in patients with clear-cell mRCC progressing after first-line sunitinib or pazopanib. The primary end point was the number of patients without progression 6 months after starting everolimus. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and overall response rate. Enrollment was terminated early due to slow recruitment; all analyses are descriptive.

RESULTS

Patients who received prior sunitinib (n = 16) or pazopanib (n = 13) were enrolled. One of 12 patients in the sunitinib group and 6/13 patients in the pazopanib group were progression-free by month 6 in the full analysis set. Median PFS in the sunitinib and pazopanib groups was 2.8 and 8.0 months, and median OS was 14.8 months and 20.4 months, respectively. Fifteen patients in the sunitinib group and 13 in the pazopanib group experienced adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Safety and efficacy results confirm the second-line everolimus profile. However, baseline differences in patient populations should be taken into consideration.

Stomatitis And Everolimus: A Review Of Current Literature On 8,201 Patients

Background

Oral toxicities, such as mucositis and stomatitis, are some of the most significant and unavoidable side effects associated with anticancer therapies. In past decades, research has focused on newer targeted agents with the aim of decreasing the rates of side effects on healthy cells. Unfortunately, even targeted anticancer therapies show significant rates of toxicity on healthy tissue. mTOR inhibitors display some adverse events, such as hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, hypophosphatemia, hematologic toxicities, and mucocutaneous eruption, but the most important are still stomatitis and skin rash, which are often dose-limiting side effects.

Aim

This review was performed to answer the question “What is the incidence of stomatitis in patients treated with everolimus?”

Methods

We conducted a systematic search on the PubMed and Medline online databases using a combination of MESH terms and free text: “everolimus” (MESH) AND “side effects” OR “toxicities” OR “adverse events”. Only studies fulfilling the following inclusion criteria were considered eligible for inclusion in this study: performed on human subjects, reporting on the use of everolimus (even if in combination with other drugs or ionizing radiation), written in the English language, and reporting the incidence of side effects.

Results

The analysis of literature revealed that the overall incidence of stomatitis after treatment with everolimus was 42.6% (3,493) and that of stomatitis grade G1/2 84.02% (2,935), while G3/4 was 15.97% (558).

Conclusion

Results of the analysis showed that the incidence of stomatitis of grade 1 or 2 is higher than grade 3 or 4. However, it must be taken into account that it is not possible to say if side effects are entirely due to everolimus therapy or combinations with other drugs.

Indirect treatment comparisons including network meta-analysis: Lenvatinib plus everolimus for the second-line treatment of advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

In the absence of clinical trials providing direct efficacy results, this study compares different methods of indirect treatment comparison (ITC), and their respective impacts on efficacy estimates for lenvatinib (LEN) plus everolimus (EVE) combination therapy compared to other second-line treatments for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (a/mRCC).

METHODS

Using EVE alone as the common comparator, the Bucher method for ITC compared LEN + EVE with cabozantinib (CAB), nivolumab (NIV), placebo (PBO) and axitinib (AXI). Hazard ratios (HR) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) estimated the impact of applying three versions of the LEN+EVE trial data in separate ITCs. Last, to overcome exchangeability bias and potential violations to the proportional hazards assumption, a network meta-analysis using fractional polynomials was performed.

RESULTS

Bucher ITCs demonstrated LEN + EVE superiority over EVE for PFS, indirect superiority to NIV, AXI, and PBO, and no difference to CAB. For OS, LEN + EVE was superior to EVE and indirectly superior to PBO, applying original HOPE 205 data. Using European Medicines Agency data, LEN + EVE was directly superior to EVE for OS. Fractional polynomial HRs for PFS and OS substantially overlapped with Bucher estimates, demonstrating LEN+EVE superiority over EVE, alone, NIV, and CAB. However, there were no statistically significant results as the credible intervals for HR crossed 1.0.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing three Bucher ITCs, LEN + EVE demonstrated superior PFS when indirectly compared to NIV, AXI, and PBO, and mixed results for OS. While fractional polynomial modelling for PFS and OS failed to find statistically significant differences in LEN + EVE efficacy, the overall HR trends were comparable.

Cancer du rein métastatique : quels critères de choix en 2e ligne ?

METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA

HOW TO CHOOSE THE APPROPRIATE SECOND-LINE TREATMENT?: The treatment of advanced or metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC) has dramatically improved in the past ten years. In the second-line setting, for patients who progressed on prior antiangiogenic therapy (mainly the VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) sunitinib or pazopanib), axitinib and everolimus have been recommended. Since 2015, other drugs have proven their efficacy and are currently considered the standard of care: cabozantinib (TKI that targets VEGFR, MET and AXL) and nivolumab (first anti-PD-1 check point inhibitor). Lenvatinib has also demonstrated promising results in association with everolimus, but this combination is not available in France. The optimal treatment choice for a given patient is challenging for the clinician when facing multiple options. In this article, we review the efficacy, safety and quality of life results of the main pivotal clinical studies involving advanced or metastatic RCC in the second-line setting, to help clinicians in selecting the most appropriate treatment. Beyond that, it is important to define all the sequencing strategy for patients to successively receive all the drugs that have demonstrated an increase in overall survival.

Cost analysis for different sequential treatment regimens for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in China

PURPOSE

Targeted therapies, including sunitinib, sorafenib, axitinib, and everolimus, have recently become the mainstay for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The objective of this study was to estimate the costs of sequential treatment regimens for mRCC and associated adverse events (AEs) from the Chinese payers' perspective.

METHODS

Key inputs included in the calculation were patient population, dosing information, incidence rates and associated costs of Grade 3/4 AEs, treatment costs (including drug discount programs), and patients' progression-free survival (PFS) as a proxy for length of treatment. To calculate PFS, this study identified pivotal clinical trials and generated a reconstructed individual patient data set from the published Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The median PFS from the pooled estimates were used in the calculation. In the base-case scenario, sunitinib was used as first line and the other three therapies were used as second line. Sensitivity analyses were conducted where (1) sorafenib was used as first line, or (2) a third-line therapy was added to the base-case scenario.

RESULTS

In the base case, the cost per patient per treatment month (PPPM) cost was the lowest for sunitinib + axitinib among all sequential regimens (¥14,898) and was the highest for sunitinib + sorafenib (¥20,103). If sorafenib is used as first line, everolimus had lower per patient per months (PPPM) cost than axitinib (¥17,046 vs ¥23,337), but also had shorter PFS (13.5 months vs 15 months). Second sensitivity analysis with an additional third-line therapy showed consistent results with the base-case scenario; axitinib as second line was the least costly.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that, for mRCC sequential treatment, sunitinib followed by axitinib generates the highest cost savings from the Chinese payers' perspective. Future studies are warranted to examine the cost-effectiveness of various mRCC treatment regimens in Chinese populations.

Everolimus

Everolimus (RAD001) is an oral protein kinase inhibitor of the mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) serine/threonine kinase signal transduction pathway. The mTOR pathway regulates cell growth, proliferation and survival, and is frequently deregulated in cancer.The EMA has approved Everolimus as Afinitor^® for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive, HER2/neu-negative advanced breast cancer, in combination with exemestane, in postmenopausal women without symptomatic visceral disease after recurrence or progression following a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor, for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic, well- or moderately differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic origin in adults with progressive disease, and for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic, well-differentiated (Grade 1 or Grade 2) nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumors of gastrointestinal or lung origin in adults with progressive disease, and for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, whose disease has progressed on or after treatment with VEGF-targeted therapy And as Votubia^® for the treatment of adult patients with renal angiomyolipoma associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), who are at risk of complications (based on factors such as tumor size or presence of aneurysm, or presence of multiple or bilateral tumors) but who do not require immediate surgery, and for the treatment of patients with subependymal giant cell astrocytoma (SEGA) associated with TSC who require therapeutic intervention but are not amenable to surgery, and as an add-on treatment in patients from 2 years of age with seizures related to TSC that have not responded to other treatments ( https://www.novartis.com/news/media-releases/novartis-drug-votubiar-receives-eu-approval-treat-refractory-partial-onset ). The FDA has approved Everolimus as Afinitor^® for the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer in combination with exemestane, after the failure of treatment with letrozole or anastrozole, for the treatment of adult patients with progressive neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic origin (PNET) with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic disease, for the treatment of adult patients with advanced RCC after failure of treatment with sunitinib or sorafenib, for the treatment of adult patients with renal angiomyolipoma and tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), not requiring immediate surgery. for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients, 3 years of age or older, with SEGA associated with TSC who require therapeutic intervention but are not candidates for curative surgical resection. Everolimus shows promising clinical activity in additional indications. Multiple Phase II and Phase III trials of everolimus alone or in combination and will help to further elucidate the role of mTOR in oncology. For a review on everolimus as immunosuppressant, please consult other sources.

Current and Emerging Therapeutic Targets for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma has evolved dramatically over recent years. In this review, we will summarize current and emerging therapies based on molecular targets and provide insight into treatment strategy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

RECENT FINDINGS

We have witnessed a paradigm shift in the therapeutic landscape as treatment was formerly reliant on cytokine-based agents which have now been replaced with therapies targeting angiogenesis, mammalian target of rapamycin pathways, and immune responses. These dramatic changes are primarily due to our improved understanding of the underlying mutations and molecular mechanisms leading to tumorigenesis and progression. We now have targeted agents in the form of small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, and mTOR inhibitors. Moreover, immunotherapy-targeting checkpoints of T-lymphocyte activity has provided increased overall survival and a new class of agents with potential to radically change the treatment options. With these agents and their combination, durable responses are increasingly seen even though treatment resistance remains a huge challenge. New treatment strategies are rapidly developing and the therapeutic landscape is expected for further evolution.

RECORD-4 multicenter phase 2 trial of second-line everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Asian versus non-Asian population subanalysis

Background

RECORD-4 assessed everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who progressed after 1 prior anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or cytokine and reinforced the clinical benefit of second-line everolimus. Because of the high percentage of patients from China enrolled in RECORD-4 (41%) and some reported differences in responses to certain targeted agents between Chinese and Western patients, this subanalysis evaluated outcomes in Asian versus non-Asian patients.

Methods

RECORD-4 enrolled patients with clear cell mRCC into 3 cohorts based on prior first-line therapy: sunitinib, other anti-VEGF (sorafenib, bevacizumab, pazopanib, other), or cytokines. Patients received everolimus 10 mg/d until progression of disease (RECIST, v1.0) or intolerance. Primary end point was progression-free survival per investigator review. Data cutoff was Sept 1, 2014.

Results

Among Asian (n = 55) versus non-Asian (n = 79) patients, 98% versus 84% had good/intermediate MSKCC prognosis; 73% versus 65% were men, and 85% versus 73% were < 65 years of age. All (100%) Asian patients were of Chinese ethnicity. Median duration of exposure was 5.5 mo for Asian and 6.0 mo for non-Asian patients. Among Asian versus non-Asian patients, median progression-free survival (months) was 7.4 versus 7.8 overall, 7.4 versus 4.0 with prior sunitinib, and 5.7 versus 9.2 with prior other anti-VEGFs. Clinical benefit rate was similar between populations: 74.5% (95% CI 61.0–85.3) for Asian patients and 74.7% (95% CI 63.6–83.8) for non-Asian patients. Most patients achieved stable disease as best overall response (Asian, 63.6%; non-Asian, 69.6%). Overall rate of grade 3/4 adverse events appeared similar for Asian (58%) and non-Asian patients (54%).

Conclusions

This RECORD-4 subanalysis demonstrated comparable efficacy and adverse event profiles of second-line everolimus in Asian and non-Asian patients. Efficacy and safety outcomes by prior therapy should be interpreted with caution because of small patient numbers in some subpopulations.

Trial registration

Everolimus as Second-line Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell.

Carcinoma (RECORD-4); ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01491672. Registration date: December 14, 2011.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4091-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Final overall survival analysis for the phase II RECORD-3 study of first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib versus first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in metastatic RCC

Background

RECORD-3 compared everolimus and sunitinib as first-line therapy, and the sequence of everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression compared with the opposite (standard) sequence in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This final overall survival (OS) analysis evaluated mature data for secondary end points.

Patients and methods

Patients received either first-line everolimus followed by second-line sunitinib at progression (n = 238) or first-line sunitinib followed by second-line everolimus (n = 233). Secondary end points were combined first- and second-line progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and safety. The impacts of neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and baseline levels of soluble biomarkers on OS were explored.

Results

At final analysis, median duration of exposure was 5.6 months for everolimus and 8.3 months for sunitinib. Median combined PFS was 21.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.1–26.7] with everolimus-sunitinib and 22.2 months (95% CI 16.0–29.8) with sunitinib-everolimus [hazard ratio (HR)_{EVE-SUN/SUN-EVE}, 1.2; 95% CI 0.9–1.6]. Median OS was 22.4 months (95% CI 18.6–33.3) for everolimus-sunitinib and 29.5 months (95% CI 22.8–33.1) for sunitinib-everolimus (HR_{EVE-SUN/SUN-EVE}, 1.1; 95% CI 0.9–1.4). The rates of grade 3 and 4 adverse events suspected to be related to second-line therapy were 47% with everolimus and 57% with sunitinib. Higher NLR and 12 soluble biomarker levels were identified as prognostic markers for poor OS with the association being largely independent of treatment sequences.

Conclusions

Results of this final OS analysis support the sequence of sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression in patients with mRCC. The safety profiles of everolimus and sunitinib were consistent with those previously reported, and there were no unexpected safety signals.

Clinical Trials number

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00903175

Clinical outcomes of the sequential use of pazopanib followed by everolimus for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A multicentre study in Korea

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to investigate the real-world clinical outcomes of first-line pazopanib and second-line everolimus in Korean patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

METHODS

Data of patients who had mRCC with clear-cell component between 2001 and 2015 at multiple institutions were collected retrospectively. To be included in the analysis, patients had to meet the following criteria: age ≥18 years; received first-line targeted therapy with pazopanib; and received second-line targeted therapy with everolimus. The primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs).

RESULT

A total of 36 patients were included in the analysis. The median followup period was 33.5 months (range 17-49.5). The median PFS was eight months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.4-9.6) after treatment with pazopanib and three months (95% CI 1.9-4.1) with everolimus. The median OS was 27 months (95% CI 16.6-37.4). The median treatment duration was seven months (range 4.3-10.8) after treatment with pazopanib and 3.5 months (range 3-4) with everolimus. Multivariate analysis revealed that the Heng risk criteria were independently associated with OS (p<0.001). Almost every patient experienced some form of AE, the majority of which were mostly mild or moderate in severity. The most common AEs were diarrhea (50%), hypertension (44.4%), and fatigue (41.7%) after treatment with pazopanib, and anemia (47.2%), stomatitis (41.7%), and fatigue (38.9%) with everolimus.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes for the patients treated with pazopanib followed by everolimus in Korea as observed by us were consistent with those reported by previous studies. The Heng risk criteria were significantly associated with the prognosis of patients with mRCC. AEs were mainly mild to moderate and readily managed.

Pharmacokinetically-targeted dosed everolimus maintenance therapy in lymphoma patients

BACKGROUND

Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, is active in refractory lymphomas. However, toxicity with flat dosing limits its usage. Speculatively, pharmacokinetically-targeted dosing could improve tolerability. Therefore, we studied serum-trough dosing with rituximab as maintenance after high-dose cyclophosphamide (HDC) consolidation in lymphoma patients.

PATIENTS/METHODS

After HDC, everolimus was dosed to serum trough levels (goal 3-15 ng/mL), with quarterly rituximab infusions for 1 year while maintaining < grade II non-hematologic and < grade III hematologic toxicities. Adult patients in first PR/CR with: mantle cell, transformed, double-hit, or high risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia or in second PR for any relapsed B cell lymphoma were eligible. Prophylaxis was given for encapsulated organisms, HSV and PCP. Serum IgG levels were maintained > 500 mg/dL.

RESULTS

49 patients, median age: 59.0 years enrolled; MCL (26), CLL (10), transformed lymphoma (7), and other histologies (6). During the life of the study, the most frequent everolimus dosing has been 2.5 mg daily or 2.5 mg every other day; at these doses, serum levels are within the therapeutic range and non-hematologic toxicity is rare. At a median follow-up of 27.1 months, three patients remain on active therapy. Two patients withdrew secondary to potentially-attributable adverse events including a bacterial pneumonia and a viral pneumonia; this low rate of discontinuation compares well to other long-term everolimus trials. While a 58 and 76% EFS at 30 months for the entire cohort and MCL cohort, respectively, compares similarly to previously published HDC/rituximab data, longer follow-up is required.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacokinetically-targeted dosing appears to increase everolimus tolerability. This finding may be applicable to other patient populations.

Efficacy and safety of sequential use of everolimus in Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma after failure of first-line treatment with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor: a multicenter phase II clinical trial

Objective

Many studies have shown the efficacy of everolimus after pretreatment with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors. We investigated the efficacy and safety of everolimus as a second-line treatment after the failure of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Methods

This was an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial conducted in Japan through the central registration system. A total of 57  patients were enrolled. Patients were administered 10 mg of everolimus q.d. orally. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival achieved by administration of everolimus.

Results

The median progression-free survival of patients administered everolimus was 5.03 months (95% confidence interval: 3.70-6.20). The median overall survival was not reached. The objective response rate was 9.4% (95% confidence interval: 3.1-20.7). The progression-free survival in the group of <100% relative dose intensity was 6.70 months (95% confidence interval: 4.13-11.60), and that in the group of 100% relative dose intensity was 3.77 months (hazard ratio: 2.79, 95% confidence interval: 2.77-5.63). The commonly observed adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were stomatitis (49.1%), hypertriglyceridemia (26.4%), interstitial lung disease (26.4%), anemia (22.6%) and hypercholesterolemia (22.6%).

Conclusion

The median progression-free survival was almost similar to that recorded in the RECORD-1 study, whereas prolongation of overall survival was observed in the present study compared with the RECORD-1 study. The treatment outcomes of first-line vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy and second-line everolimus treatment in Japanese patients were successfully established in the present study.

Real-world experience of everolimus as second-line treatment in metastatic renal cell cancer after failure of pazopanib

Aim

We aimed to provide real-life data on the outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with everolimus as second-line treatment after failure of first-line pazopanib.

Patients and methods

Data from the medical charts of mRCC patients from 8 centers in Greece and Spain were reviewed. All patients had received or were continuing to receive second-line everolimus treatment after failure of first-line treatment with pazopanib. No other previous therapies were allowed. The primary end point was the determination of progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

In total, 31 patients were enrolled. Of these, 26% had performance status (PS) >0, 88% were of intermediate/poor Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk group, and only 61% had undergone prior nephrectomy. Median PFS was 3.48 months (95% CI: 2.37–5.06 months). Median overall survival (OS) from everolimus initiation was 8.9 months (95% CI: 6.47–13.14 months). Median OS from pazopanib initiation was 14.78 months (95% CI: 10.54–19.08 months). Furthermore, 32% of patients temporarily discontinued everolimus due to adverse events (AEs), and 22% of patients discontinued everolimus permanently due to toxicity. Most common toxicities were anemia (29%), stomatitis (26%), pneumonitis (19%), and fatigue (10%). Moreover, 14 AEs (27%) were graded as 3 or 4 and were reported by 13 patients (42%).

Conclusion

This study provides data exclusively on the sequence pazopanib–everolimus in mRCC. Everolimus has a favorable safety profile and is active. The short PFS and OS could be attributed to the fact that the pazopanib–everolimus sequence was mainly offered to patients with adverse prognostic features, resulting in a modest increase in the combined OS of our population.

Therapeutic Strategies for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Whom First-Line Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-Directed Therapies Fail

Metastases are present in one third of renal cell carcinomas at diagnosis. The overall survival duration in metastatic renal cell carcinoma is approximately 22 months, which underlines the need for more effective systemic treatments. Therapies on the basis of antiangiogenic agents and inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin have been approved for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma, but only benefits for progression-free survival were demonstrated in the second-line setting. Fortunately, promising treatments are emerging, from new antiangiogenic agents to immune checkpoint inhibitors. For the first time, both an immune checkpoint inhibitor (nivolumab) and a dual inhibitor of the tyrosine kinases c-Met and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (cabozantinib) have demonstrated improvements in overall survival in the second-line setting. Finding the best sequence for these novel agents will be crucial to improving outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. This article comprises both a systematic review of the literature and recommendations for second-line therapeutic strategies for patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma in whom inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor have failed.

New treatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma with prior anti-angiogenesis therapy

Angiogenesis is a critical process in the progression of advanced renal cell carcinoma. Agents targeting angiogenesis have played a primary role in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. However, resistance to anti-angiogenesis therapy almost always occurs, and major progress has been made in understanding its underlying molecular mechanism. Axitinib and everolimus have been used extensively in patients whom have had disease progression after prior anti-angiogenesis therapy. Recently, several new agents have been shown to improve overall survival in comparison with everolimus. This review provides an in-depth summary of drugs employable in the clinical setting, the rationale to their use, and the studies conducted leading to their approval for use and provides perspective on the paradigm shift in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. Highlighted are the newly approved agents cabozantinib, nivolumab, and lenvatinib for advanced renal cell carcinoma patients treated with prior anti-angiogenesis therapy.

Angiogenesis and Metabolism: Entwined for Therapy Resistance

Angiogenesis and metabolism are entwined processes that permit tumor growth and progression. Blood vessel supply is necessary for tumor survival not only by providing oxygen and nutrients for anabolism but also by removing waste products from cellular metabolism. On the other hand, blocking angiogenesis with antiangiogenic therapies shows clinical benefits in treating several tumor types. Nevertheless, resistance to therapy emerges over time. In this review we discuss a novel mechanism of adaptive resistance involving metabolic adaptation of tumor cells, and we also provide examples of tumor adaptation to therapy, which may represent a new mechanism of resistance in several types of cancer. Thus, targeting this metabolic tumor adaptation could be a way to avoid resistance in cancer patients.

Caloric restriction - A promising anti-cancer approach: From molecular mechanisms to clinical trials

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide and the morbidity is growing in developed countries. According to WHO, >14 million people per year are diagnosed with cancer and about 8 million die. Anti-cancer strategy includes chemo-, immune- and radiotherapy or their combination. Unfortunately, these widely used strategies often have insufficient efficacy and significant toxic effects on healthy cells. Consequently, the improvement of treatment approaches is an important goal. One of promising schemes to enhance the effect of therapy is the restriction of calorie intake or some nutrients. The combination of caloric restriction or its chemical mimetics along with anti-cancer drugs may suppress growth of tumor cells and enhance death of cancer cells. That will allow the dose of therapeutic drugs to be decreased and their toxic effects to be reduced. Here the possibility of using this combinatory therapy as well as the molecular mechanisms underlying this approach will be discussed.

Oncology Gold Standard™ practical consensus recommendations 2016 for treatment of advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma

The Oncology Gold Standard (OGS) Expert Group on renal cell carcinoma (RCC) developed the consensus statement to provide community oncologists practical guidelines on the management of advanced clear cell (cc) RCC using published evidence, practical experience of experts in real life management, and results of a nationwide survey involving 144 health-care professionals. Six broad question categories containing 33 unique questions cover major situations in the routine management of RCC. This document serves as a ready guide for the standard of care to optimize outcome. The table of "Take Home Messages" at the end is a convenient tool for busy practitioners.

The Wide Experience of the Sequential Therapy for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Sequential targeted therapies are the standard of care for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Several drugs are available for patients whose disease progresses while they receive initial tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy; these include nivolumab (an inhibitor of PD-1 receptor), everolimus (an inhibitor of the mechanistic target of rapamycin) or additional TKIs. Until now, there has been no clinical evidence to support the use of one strategy versus another, so investigators and physicians rely on experience, judgement and findings from molecular analyses to select the appropriate treatment. However, with the arrival of nivolumab and cabozantinib that provide an overall survival higher than other alternative treatments, therapeutic strategies may have changed. Here, we discuss findings from preclinical and clinical studies that might help clinicians to choose the optimal treatment approach for patients with mRCC who progress to initial therapy.

Everolimus in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy

Introduction

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common type of kidney cancer in adults, and its pathogenesis is strictly related to altered cellular response to hypoxia, in which mTOR signaling pathway is implicated. Everolimus, an mTOR serine/threonine kinase inhibitor, represents a therapeutic option for the treatment of advanced RCC.

Aim

The objective of this article is to review the evidence for the treatment of metastatic RCC with everolimus.

Evidence review

Everolimus was approved for second- and third-line therapy in patients with advanced RCC according to the results of a Phase III pivotal trial that demonstrated a benefit in median progression-free survival of ~2 months compared to placebo after failure of previous lines of therapy, of which at least one was an anti-VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). The role of this drug in first-line setting has been investigated in Phase II trials, with no significant clinical benefit, even in combination with bevacizumab. Everolimus activity in non-clear cell RCC is supported by two randomized Phase II trials that confirmed the benefit in second-line setting but not in first line. Recently, two randomized Phase III trials (METEOR and CheckMate 025) demonstrated the inferiority of everolimus in second-line setting compared to the TKI cabozantinib and to the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab, respectively. Moreover, a recent Phase II study demonstrated a significant benefit for the second-line combination treatment with everolimus plus lenvatinib (a novel TKI) in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival compared to the single-agent everolimus. Basing on preclinical data, the main downstream effectors of mTOR cascade, S6RP and its phosphorylated form, could be good predictive biomarkers of response to everolimus. The safety profile of the drug is favorable, with a good cost-effectiveness compared to second-line sorafenib or axitinib, and no significant impact on the quality of life of treated patients has been found.

Conclusion

Everolimus still represents a current standard of treatment for RCC progressive to previous treatment lines with VEGFR-TKI. The evidence about two new molecules, cabozantinib and nivolumab, successfully tested head-to-head with everolimus in recently published Phase III trials, will determine the shift of everolimus to the third-line setting and subsequent lines of treatment.