Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who benefit from axitinib dose titration: analysis from a randomised, double-blind phase II study

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.

Optimization of blood pressure measurement practices for pharmacodynamic analyses of tyrosine-kinase inhibitors

Blood pressure measurements form a critical component of adverse event monitoring for tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but might also serve as a biomarker for dose titrations. This study explored the impact of various sources of within-individual variation on blood pressure readings to improve measurement practices and evaluated the utility for individual- and population-level dose selection. A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling framework was created to describe circadian blood pressure changes, inter- and intra-day variability, changes from dipper to non-dipper profiles, and the relationship between drug exposure and blood pressure changes over time. The framework was used to quantitatively evaluate the influence of physiological and pharmacological aspects on blood pressure measurements, as well as to compare measurement techniques, including office-based, home-based, and ambulatory 24-h blood pressure readings. Circadian changes, as well as random intra-day and inter-day variability, were found to be the largest sources of within-individual variation in blood pressure. Office-based and ambulatory 24-h measurements gave rise to potential bias (>5 mmHg), which was mitigated by model-based estimations. Our findings suggest that 5-8 consecutive, home-based, measurements taken at a consistent time around noon, or alternatively within a limited time frame (e.g., 8.00 a.m. to 12.00 p.m. or 12.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.), will give rise to the most consistent blood pressure estimates. Blood pressure measurements likely do not represent a sufficiently accurate method for individual-level dose selection, but may be valuable for population-level dose identification. A user-friendly tool has been made available to allow for interactive blood pressure simulations and estimations for the investigated scenarios.

Reversing pathology in a preclinical model of Alzheimer's disease by hacking cerebrovascular neoangiogenesis with advanced cancer therapeutics

BACKGROUND

Cognitive decline leading to dementia, accompanied by the accumulation of amyloid-beta (Aβ) in neuritic plaques together with the appearance of neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) composed of hyperphosphorylated tau protein (tau), are previously noted hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD). We previously discovered hypervascularity in brain specimens from AD patients and consistent with this observation, we demonstrated that overexpression of Aβ drives cerebrovascular neoangiogenesis leading to hypervascularity and coincident tight-junction disruption and blood-brain barrier (BBB) leakiness in animal models of AD. We subsequently demonstrated that amyloid plaque burden and cerebrovascular pathogenesis subside when pro-angiogenic Aβ levels are reduced. Based on these data, we propose a paradigm of AD etiology where, as a compensatory response to impaired cerebral blood flow (CBF), Aβ triggers pathogenic cerebrovascular neoangiogenesis that underlies the conventional hallmarks of AD. Consequently, here we present evidence that repurposing anti-cancer drugs to modulate cerebrovascular neoangiogenesis, rather than directly targeting the amyloid cascade, may provide an effective treatment for AD and related vascular diseases of the brain.

METHODS

We explored whether the anti-cancer drug, Axitinib, a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR) can inhibit aberrant cerebrovascular neoangiogenic changes, reduce Aβ deposits and reverse cognitive decline in an animal model of AD. One month post-treatment with Axitinib, we employed a battery of tests to assess cognition and memory in aged Tg2576 AD mice and used molecular analysis to demonstrate reduction of amyloid plaques, BBB leakage, hypervascularity and associated disease pathology.

FINDINGS

Targeting the pro-angiogenic pathway in AD using the cancer drug, Axitinib, dramatically reduced cerebrovascular neoangiogenesis, restored BBB integrity, resolved tight-junction pathogenesis, diminishes Aβ depositions in plaques and effectively restores memory and cognitive performance in a preclinical mouse model of AD.

INTERPRETATION

Modulation of neoangiogenesis, in an analogous approach to those used to treat aberrant vascularization in cancer and also in the wet form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD), provides an alternative therapeutic strategy for intervention in AD that warrants clinical investigation.

FUNDING

None.

The efficacy of axitinib as a first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

AIM

To evaluate predictive factors which associated with oncological outcomes to first-line axitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted patients who had been treated with axitinib as first-line therapy for the treatment of mRCC from September 2013 to February 2018. Axitinib was given by single daily oral administration at a dose of 10 mg, which was reduced according to adverse events (AEs). We investigated progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and AEs.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight mRCC patients were enrolled. The median follow-up duration of axitinib treatment was 11.3 months (range = 1.0-56.9). ORR was 28.9%. Median PFS and OS was 12.8, and 17.9 months, respectively. In univariate analysis, baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), neutrophil, corrected calcium (Ca), platelets (Plt) and time from diagnosis were selected as potential predictive factors. Multivariate Cox's proportional hazards model analysis showed that the number of risk factors were associated with PFS (P = 0.03) and OS (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Baseline LDH, neutrophil, Ca, Plt and time from diagnosis are predictive factors for both PFS and OS in first-line treatment with axitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.