Dose escalation can maximize therapeutic potential of sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Assessing the effectiveness and safety of surufatinib versus everolimus or sunitinib in advanced neuroendocrine neoplasms: insights from a real-world, retrospective cohort study using propensity score and inverse probability treatment weighting analysis

Background

While surufatinib, sunitinib, and everolimus have shown efficacy for advanced neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), direct comparisons in a real-world setting remain unexplored. This gap highlights the clinical need to understand their comparative effectiveness and safety within the diverse Chinese population. Addressing this, our study provides insights into the real-world performance of these therapies, aiming to inform treatment selection and improve patient outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective, observational study was conducted at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, including patients with advanced NENs treated with surufatinib, sunitinib, or everolimus between July 2020 and April 2023. Eligibility criteria focused on histologically confirmed, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic NENs, with patients having received at least one month of targeted therapy. We employed inverse probability weighting (IPW) with the propensity score (PS) matching to adjust for the bias of baseline characteristics. The assessment of covariates included age, sex, performance status, primary tumor site, functional status, genetic mutations, tumor differentiation, Ki67 index, tumor grade, metastasis site, and previous therapies. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary outcomes included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs).

Results

The study enrolled 123, 56, and 68 locally advanced or metastatic NEN patients treated with surufatinib, sunitinib, and everolimus, respectively. Before adjusting for confounding factors, surufatinib was used less frequently as a first-line treatment compared to sunitinib and everolimus in pancreatic NENs (pNENs) (11.1% vs. 22.1%, P=0.057). Significant differences were noted in prior treatments and tumor characteristics between surufatinib and everolimus groups in extrapancreatic NENs (epNENs) (P<0.05). Post-IPW, these disparities were resolved (P>0.05). Surufatinib demonstrated superior median PFS (mPFS) in both pancreatic [8.30 vs. 6.33 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.592, P<0.001] and epNENs (8.73 vs. 3.70 months, HR 0.608, P<0.001) compared to everolimus or sunitinib. Notably, male gender (HR 1.75, P=0.001), functional status (HR 2.09, P=0.01), Ki67 index >20% (HR 12.7, P=0.004), previous somatostatin analogue (SSA) treatment (HR 1.73, P=0.001), germline mutation (HR 5.62, P<0.001), poor differentiation (HR 7.45, P<0.001), liver metastasis (HR 1.72, P=0.001) and multiple treatment lines (HR 1.62 for 2nd line, P=0.04; HR 1.88 for ≥3rd line, P=0.01) were identified as negative prognostic factors for PFS. Conversely, dose adjustment (HR 0.63, P=0.009) and treatment with surufatinib (HR 0.58 for pNEN, P<0.001; HR 0.62 for epNEN, P=0.002) were correlated with longer PFS.

Conclusions

In a real-world Chinese cohort, surufatinib significantly outperformed sunitinib and everolimus in prolonging PFS among advanced NEN patients, with identifiable clinical features impacting survival, and conclusions regarding superiority should be interpreted with caution due to the retrospective design. Our findings underscore the need for prospective studies to further validate these results and explore additional predictive biomarkers for personalized treatment strategies.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Sunitinib in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors and Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Adults-A Review

BACKGROUND

Sunitinib is an inhibitor of multiple receptor tyrosine kinases and is a standard-of-care treatment for advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma and a second-line treatment in locally advanced inoperable and metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors. A fixed dose of the drug, however, does not produce a uniform therapeutic outcome in all patients, and many face adverse effects and/or toxicity. One of the possible causes of the interindividual variability in the efficacy and toxicity response is the highly variable systemic exposure to sunitinib and its active metabolite. This review aims to summarize all available clinical evidence of the treatment of adult patients using sunitinib in approved indications, addressing the necessity to introduce proper and robust therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of sunitinib and its major metabolite, N-desethylsunitinib.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic search of the available scientific literature using the PubMed online database. The search terms were "sunitinib" AND "therapeutic drug monitoring" OR "TDM" OR "plasma levels" OR "concentration" OR "exposure." The search yielded 520 journal articles. In total, 447 publications were excluded because they lacked sufficient relevance to the reviewed topic. The remaining 73 articles were, together with currently valid guidelines, thoroughly reviewed.

RESULTS

There is sufficient evidence confirming the concentration-efficacy and concentration-toxicity relationship in the indications of gastrointestinal stromal tumors and metastatic renal clear-cell carcinoma. For optimal therapeutic response, total (sunitinib + N-desethylsunitinib) trough levels of 50-100 ng/mL serve as a reasonable target therapeutic range. To avoid toxicity, the total trough levels should not exceed 100 ng/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the current evidence presented in this review, a TDM-guided dose modification of sunitinib in selected groups of patients could provide a better treatment outcome while simultaneously preventing sunitinib toxicity.

Preclinical impact of high dose intermittent antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitor pazopanib in intrinsically resistant tumor models

Antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) target vascular endothelial growth factor receptors and other receptor tyrosine kinases. As a result of toxicity, the clinical failures or the modest benefits associated with antiangiogenic TKI therapy may be related in some cases to suboptimal drug dosing and scheduling, thereby facilitating resistance. Most antiangiogenic TKIs, including pazopanib, are administered on a continuous daily basis. Here, instead, we evaluated the impact of increasing the dose and administering the drug intermittently. The rationale is that using such protocols, antitumor efficacy could be enhanced by direct tumor cell targeting effects in addition to inhibiting tumor angiogenesis. To test this, we employed two human tumor xenograft models, both of which manifest intrinsic resistance to pazopanib when it is administered continuously: the VHL-wildtype SN12-PM6-1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and the metastatic MDA-MB-231/LM2-4 variant breast cancer cell line, when treated as distant metastases. We evaluated four different doses and schedules of pazopanib in the context of primary tumors and advanced metastatic disease, in both models. The RCC model was not converted to drug sensitivity using the intermittent protocol. Using these protocols did not enhance the efficacy when treating primary LM2-4 tumors. However, one of the high-dose intermittent pazopanib protocols increased median survival when treating advanced metastatic disease. In conclusion, these results overall suggest that primary tumors showing sensitivity to continuous pazopanib treatment may predict response to this drug when given at high doses intermittently in the context of advanced metastatic disease, that are otherwise resistant to the conventional protocol.