Axitinib after Sunitinib in Metastatic Renal Cancer: Preliminary Results from Italian "Real-World" SAX Study

Axitinib after Treatment Failure with Sunitinib or Cytokines in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma-Systematic Literature Review of Clinical and Real-World Evidence

BACKGROUND

We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify clinical evidence on treatments in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) after the failure of prior therapy with cytokines, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or immune checkpoint inhibitors. Herein, we summarise the evidence for axitinib in aRCC after the failure of prior therapy with cytokines or sunitinib.

METHODS

This SLR was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023492931) and followed the 2020 PRISMA statement and the Cochrane guidelines. Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE and Embase as well as for conference proceedings. Study eligibility was defined according to population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and study design.

RESULTS

Of 1252 titles/abstracts screened, 266 peer-reviewed publications were reviewed, of which 182 were included. In addition, 28 conference abstracts were eligible. Data on axitinib were reported in 55 publications, of which 16 provided efficacy and/or safety outcomes on axitinib after therapy with sunitinib or cytokines. In these patients, median progression-free and overall survival ranged between 5.5 and 8.7 months and 11.0 and 69.5 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Axitinib is commonly used in clinical practice and has a well-characterised safety and efficacy profile in the treatment of patients with aRCC after the failure of prior therapy with sunitinib or cytokines.

Axitinib Induces and Aggravates Hypertension Regardless of Prior Treatment With Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Background: Axitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor receptor signaling and is approved for second-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Although the occurrence of hypertension with axitinib use has been documented, it is unclear whether a first-line TKI regimen can significantly affect the development of hypertension when axitinib is used as second-line therapy. Methods and Results: In this single-center retrospective study, advanced RCC patients treated with axitinib after first-line chemotherapy were divided into 2 groups according to the use of TKIs as part of first-line treatment before the initiation of axitinib. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients who were treated with (TKI(+); n=11) or without (TKI(-); n=11) a TKI. Although 63.6% of all patients had hypertension at baseline, axitinib-induced hypertension developed in 81.8% of patients, and 36.4% of patients experienced Grade 3 hypertension. After initiation of axitinib, both systolic and diastolic blood pressures and the hypertension grade were significantly elevated both in the TKI(+) and TKI(-) groups, and the number of antihypertensive drugs was significantly increased among all patients. Conclusions: This study suggests the need for proper monitoring and management of blood pressure in RCC patients treated with axitinib, regardless of a prior regimen with or without TKIs.

Clinical and Pathological Characteristics of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Needing a Second-Line Therapy: A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

The management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) represents a clinical challenge. Progression or toxicity may occur during first-line treatments and many patients require a second-line option. Given the expanding options for second-line therapies clinicians are faced with the challenge to individualize treatment. We performed a systematic review in order to summarize available evidences about the clinicopathological profile of mRCC patients who receive a second-line therapy. We identified twenty-nine studies enrolling 7650 patients. Discontinuation of first-line therapy was due to progression in the majority of patients with 77.8% patients harboring ≥2 metastatic sites. Most patients had a good performance status, their age ranged from 55 to 70 years and their prognostic profile revealed a good or intermediate disease in most cases. Tailoring of second-line treatment strategies based on these features is strongly advocated.

Abstract

A high percentage of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) require a second-line option. We aimed to summarize available evidences about the clinicopathological profile of mRCC patients who receive a second-line therapy. A systematic review was performed in August 2020. We included papers that met the following criteria: original research; English language; human studies; enrolling mRCC patients entering a second-line therapy. Twenty-nine studies enrolling 7650 patients (73.5% male, mean age: 55 to 70 years) were included. Clear cell histology was reported in 74.4% to 100% of cases. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors, immunotherapy, bevacizumab, mTOR inhibitors, and chemotherapy were adopted as first line option in 68.5%, 29.2%, 2.9%, 0.6%, and 0.2% of patients, respectively. Discontinuation of first-line therapy was due to progression and toxicity in 18.4% to 100% and in 17% to 48.8% of patients, respectively. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score was 0 or 1 in most cases. Most prevalent prognostic categories according to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium and Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Centre score were intermediate and good. About 77.8% of patients harboured ≥2 metastatic sites. In conclusion, patients who enter a second-line therapy are heterogeneous in terms of a clinical-pathological profile. Tailoring of second-line treatment strategies is strongly advocated.

Treatment patterns, outcomes and clinical characteristics in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a real-world US study

Aim: Assessing treatment patterns, outcomes and clinical characteristics in advanced renal cell carcinoma clinical practice. Materials & methods: A US cross-sectional physician survey conducted February-September 2019. Results: Surveyed physicians reported first-line treatment of 445 patients involving tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy (51.0%), immuno-oncology (IO/IO combination) therapy (25.8%) or other regimens (23.1%). A total of 60.9% had physician-assessed IMDC risk. Of these 61.9, 50.9 and 27.6% of patients with favorable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively, received tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy. A total of 16.7, 26.9 and 34.5% of patients with favorable, intermediate or poor risk received IO/IO combination therapy. Complete/partial responses (∼35% patients) remained comparable across first-line treatments. Conclusion: Guideline-recommended therapies are not widely prescribed. Many patients experienced poor clinical outcomes highlighting a need for more effective treatments.

Survival Benefits of Second-line Axitinib Versus Everolimus After First Line Sunitinib Treatment in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Background

Targeted therapies significantly improve clinical outcomes among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Several new agents have been approved for first- and second-line use. However, there is a lack of compelling evidence comparing sequencing strategies, and available comparative data regarding the real-world effectiveness of different therapeutic sequences are limited.

Materials and Methods

We identified mRCC patients who initiated targeted therapy between January 1, 2008 and May 31, 2017 from the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) database of Hungary. Overall survival (OS) and duration of first-line treatment (DFT) were obtained for patients receiving sunitinib-everolimus, sunitinib-axitinib, or pazopanib-everolimus treatment sequences. OS of sunitinib-everolimus and sunitinib-axitinib sequences was also determined for patients having better or worse response to sunitinib first-line therapy.

Results

Median OS was significantly longer among patients treated with sunitinib-axitinib compared to those receiving sunitinib-everolimus. Median DFT was also significantly longer in the sunitinib-axitinib vs. sunitinib-everolimus group. Sunitinib-axitinib was associated with significantly longer median OS compared to sunitinib-everolimus in patients with better response to first-line sunitinib in the pooled sunitinib population. In patients with worse response to sunitinib, sunitinib-axitinib was associated with a trend towards greater OS compared to sunitinib-everolimus, but the difference did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions

In this nationwide database analysis, mRCC patients treated with the sunitinib-axitinib sequence had significantly longer OS compared to those receiving sunitinib-everolimus therapy. The OS benefits of second-line axitinib were consistent among patients with better response to sunitinib defined by DFT values.

Biomarkers of Prognosis and Efficacy of Anti-angiogenic Therapy in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cancer

In the last decades, the prognosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has remarkably improved following the advent of the "targeted therapy" era. The expanding knowledge on the prominent role played by angiogenesis in RCC pathogenesis has led to approval of multiple anti-angiogenic agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib, axitinib, cabozantinib, sorafenib, and bevacizumab. These agents can induce radiological responses and delay cancer progression for months or years before onset of resistance, with a clinically meaningful activity. The need for markers of prognosis and efficacy of anti-angiogenic agents has become more compelling as novel systemic immunotherapy agents have also been approved in RCC and can be administered as an alternative to angiogenesis inhibitors. Anti PD-1 monoclonal antibody nivolumab has been approved in the second-line setting after tyrosine kinase inhibitors failure, while combination of nivolumab plus anti CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody ipilimumab has been approved as first-line therapy of RCC patients at intermediate or poor prognosis. In this review article, biomarkers of prognosis and efficacy of antiangiogenic therapies are summarized with a focus on those that have the potential to affect treatment decision-making in RCC. Biomarkers predictive of toxicity of anti-angiogenic agents have also been discussed.

Second line therapy with axitinib after only prior sunitinib in metastatic renal cell cancer: Italian multicenter real world SAX study final results

BACKGROUND

This multi-institutional retrospective real life study was conducted in 22 Italian Oncology Centers and evaluated the role of Axitinib in second line treatment in not selected mRCC patients.

METHODS

148 mRCC patients were evaluated. According to Heng score 15.5%, 60.1% and 24.4% of patients were at poor risk, intermediate and favorable risk, respectively.

RESULTS

PFS, OS, DCR and ORR were 7.14 months, 15.5 months, 70.6% and 16.6%, respectively. The duration of prior sunitinib treatment correlated with a longer significant mPFS, 8.8 vs 6.3 months, respectively. Axitinib therapy was safe, without grade 4 adverse events. The most frequent toxicities of all grades were: fatigue (50%), hypertension (26%), and hypothyroidism (18%). G3 blood pressure elevation significantly correlated with longer mPFS and mOS compared to G1-G2 or no toxicity. Dose titration (DT) to 7 mg and 10 mg bid was feasible in 24% with no statistically significant differences in mPFS and mOS. The sunitinib-axitinib sequence was safe and effective, the mOS was 41.15 months. At multivariate analysis, gender, DCR to axitinib and to previous sunitinib correlated significantly with PFS; whereas DCR to axitinib, nephrectomy and Heng score independently affected overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Axitinib was effective and safe in a not selected real life mRCC population. Trial registration INT - Napoli - 11/16 oss. Registered 20 April 2016. http://www.istitutotumori.na.it.

Second-line treatment after sunitinib therapy in patients with renal cell carcinoma: a comparison of axitinib and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors

This retrospective study compared the outcomes of sequential therapy using sunitinib followed by axitinib or the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors (everolimus or temsirolimus). Among 234 patients treated with molecular-targeted drugs for metastatic renal cell carcinoma, we selected 137 patients treated with sunitinib as the first-line therapy. We then compared patients treated with axitinib (n = 52) or mTOR inhibitors (n = 31), as the second-line treatment, and investigated the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The PFS of axitinib-treated patients (median 8.7 months) was superior to that of mTOR inhibitors-treated patients (median 3.4 months; P = 0.001). Additionally, the OS from baseline of axitinib-treated patients (median 69 months) was superior to that of mTOR inhibitors-treated patients (median 33.4 months; P = 0.034). A multivariate analysis was performed with the following factors: the drugs used for the second-line treatment, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk classification during the initial treatment, whether the discontinuation of the first-line treatment was due to adverse events, and whether the duration of response of the first-line treatment was less than 6 or 12 months. Importantly, the drugs used for the second-line treatment and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk classification were independent factors. Our findings suggest that axitinib works better than mTOR inhibitors after the first-line treatment with sunitinib.

Network meta-analysis of second-line treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: efficacy and safety

This paper aims to compare the approved second-line treatment options in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. A network meta-analysis (NMA) using the frequentist approach and generalized pairwise modeling was computed for the approved drugs in this setting. The results of this NMA showed that the combination of lenvatinib and everolimus yielded the lowest hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (HR: 0.4; 95% CI: 0.21–0.75) and overall survival (HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.30–1.00). The great efficacy of this combination is limited by the prevalence of grade 3–4 adverse events (70.6%) leading to treatment discontinuation in 17.6%. This NMA is to the best of our knowledge, the first analysis of the approved regimens for the second-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Axitinib in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma: design, development, and place in therapy

Since 2005, the approved first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma consists in tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs). Axitinib is an oral second-generation TKI and a potent VEGFR inhibitor with a half maximal inhibitory concentration for the VEGF family receptors 10-fold lower than other TKIs. Axitinib activity in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients has been studied in various settings and particularly as second-line treatment. In this setting, axitinib with clinically based dose escalation compared to sorafenib has demonstrated an improvement in progression-free survival in a randomized Phase III trial leading to US Food and Drug Administration approval. In the first-line setting, axitinib failed to demonstrate improved efficacy over sorafenib, but the field of RCC treatment is rapidly changing with novel TKIs as cabozantinib or the emergence of check point inhibitors as nivolumab and the place of axitinib in therapy is therefore challenged. In this review, we focus on axitinib pharmacological and clinical properties in RCC patients and discuss its place in the treatment of patients with RCC.

Axitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: beyond the second-line setting

Treatment options for advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma have advanced considerably in the past decade with the approval of several targeted agents, including axitinib. Axitinib is a potent and selective inhibitor of VEGFRs 1-3, and is well established as second-line treatment. This article summarizes factors to be considered when administering axitinib, such as individualized dose titration and axitinib-associated adverse events, in order to retain patients longer on treatment, which would likely lead to improved efficacy outcomes. In addition, potential clinical perspectives for axitinib beyond the second-line setting, including its role in the first-line setting, sequential therapy, neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies, and combination therapy with immunotherapy, in particular, immune checkpoint inhibitors, are discussed.

Axitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: patient characteristics and treatment patterns in US community oncology centers

AIM

To study patient characteristics and treatment patterns in real-world axitinib use for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PATIENTS & METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of second- or third-line axitinib use between 1 January 2012 and 31 October 2014 in 135 metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients using the US Oncology Network database.

RESULTS

Overall, 86.7% had clear cell histology, 57.8% had stage III/IV disease at diagnosis and 55.6% were poor risk by Heng criteria. Median treatment duration was 4.6 months (range: 0.03-35.49); 80.7% initiated axitinib at 5 mg/day twice daily, and 67.4% maintained this dose. Overall, 77.8% discontinued treatment, mainly due to disease progression (50.5%) and toxicity (21.9%).

CONCLUSION

Axitinib usage patterns were consistent with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines^®. Ease of use among community oncologists and patient tolerance are key features of axitinib.