Initial experience with first-line pazopanib in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A single institution data

Randomized clinical trials and real life studies: Comparison of baseline characteristics of patients in oral target therapies for renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Pivotal Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) constitute scientific evidence in support of therapeutic choices when a drug is authorized in the market. In RCTs, patients are selected in a rigorous manner, in order to avoid bias that may influence efficacy assessments. Therefore, patients who take the drug in Real Life Studies (RLSs) are not the same as those participating in RCTs, which, in turn, leads to low data transferability from RCTs to RLS. The objective of this study was to evaluate the differences between RCTs and RLS, in terms of patient baseline characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our study includes all oral target therapies for RCC (Renal Cell Carcinoma) marketed in Europe before March 31, 2019. For each treatment, we considered both RCTs and RLSs, the former gathered from Summary of Product Characteristics published on the European Medicine Agency (EMA) website, and the latter yielded by our search in relevant literature. For each drug considered, we then compared the baseline characteristics of patients included in the RCT samples with those of the samples included in the RLSs using the Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney tests.

RESULTS

We considered six medicines, for a total of 9 pivotal RCTs and 31 RLSs. RCTs reported the same type of patient baseline characteristics, whereas RLSs are more varied in reporting. Some patient baseline characteristics (metastases, previous treatments, etc.) were significantly different between RCTs and RLs. Other characteristics, such as ECOG Performance Status, brain metastases, and comorbidities, liver and kidney failure, are comprised in exclusion criteria of RCTs, though are included in RLS.Discussion and Conclusion: While evaluating equal treatments for the same indications, RCTs and RLSs do not always assess patients with the same characteristics. It would be necessary to produce evidence from RLSs so as to have an idea of treatment effectiveness in patients groups that are not eligible or underrepresented in RCTs.

First-Line Pazopanib Treatment in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Real-World Data From a Single Chinese Center

The response to pazopanib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been found to differ in Western and Eastern populations. Here, we analyzed the efficacy and side effects of pazopanib as first-line therapy in 31 consecutive patients with mRCC who were treated at a single Chinese center. Thirty-one consecutive patients with mRCC (20 males and 11 females, median age 59 years) were treated with pazopanib between October 2017 and July 2019. All patients had received a pathological diagnosis of RCC by prior radical nephrectomy or biopsy. All cases were treated with pazopanib (800 mg/day orally) as first-line therapy. Administration was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicities occurred. Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety were evaluated. Twenty-nine patients were eligible for final analysis. At the median follow-up of 12.7 months, 34.5% (10/29) patients achieved a partial response (PR), 41.4% (12/29) patients had stable disease (SD), seven (24.1%) patients had disease progression (PD), and one patient had died. The ORR and DCR were 34.5% and 75.9%, respectively, and the median PFS was 10.1 months (95% confidence interval, 4.1–17.7 months). OS could not be determined. The most common side effects were fatigue (11 cases, 37.9%), hand-foot syndrome (10 cases, 34.5%), change of hair color (10 cases, 34.5%), elevated alanine transaminase (ALT)/aspartate transaminase (AST) (10 cases, 34.5%), hypertension (seven cases, 24.1%), neutropenia (three cases, 10.3%), anemia (three cases, 10.3%), thrombocytopenia (two cases, 6.9%), and diarrhea (one cases, 3.4%). Major (grade 3 or higher) adverse events included hand-foot syndrome (two cases, 6.9%) and thrombocytopenia (one case, 3.4%). Most adverse events were ameliorated by dose reduction or treatment interruption. Remissions occurred in almost all patients with local recurrence or pulmonary metastases, whereas PD occurred in patients with bone, liver or brain metastases. Our real-world data suggest that pazopanib is definitely efficacious as first-line therapy for mRCC, with well-tolerated side effects. Different metastatic lesions may have different sensitivity to pazopanib. An additional, large sample, multicenter, prospective study is needed to confirm our results.

Pazopanib as a possible option for the treatment of metastatic non-clear cell renal carcinoma patients: a systematic review

Background:

Effective systemic treatment of non-clear cell renal carcinoma (nccRCC) is still an unmet clinical need, with few studies to support an evidence-based approach. To date, the only recommended standard first-line treatment is sunitinib. Pazopanib may also be used in nccRCC but its place in therapy is not clearly established. It has comparable efficacy and better tolerability than sunitinib in clear cell renal carcinoma. Our objective was to review the use of pazopanib in metastatic nccRCC.

Methods:

We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. Any type of study reporting the use of pazopanib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma including cases with non-clear cell histology was eligible.

Results:

In all, 15 studies were included in our analysis, including a total of 318 nccRCC patients treated with pazopanib. Most studies were retrospective (n = 12); three were prospective trials. The specific outcomes of nccRCC patients were reported by four studies. Pazopanib alone as first-line treatment gave overall response rates ranging from 27% to 33%, disease control rates of 81–89%, median progression free survival of 8.1–16.5 months and median overall survival of 17.3–31.0 months. Grade 3–4 adverse events rates were 21–55%.

Conclusion:

The present review provides for the first time a systematic summary of evidence about the possible use of pazopanib as first-line treatment for nccRCC, with a favorable outcome despite the low strength of evidence. Pazopanib could be considered as a possible therapeutic option in this setting.