Prior Antiangiogenic Therapy Research Articles

A phase 2 trial of lenvatinib 18 mg versus 14 mg once daily (QD) in combination with everolimus (5 mg QD) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after 1 prior VEGF-targeted treatment.

TPS707 Background: Based on findings from a randomized phase 2 study (Study 205), lenvatinib (LEN) + everolimus (EVE) was approved in the United States and European Union for patients (pts) with advanced RCC following 1 prior anti-angiogenic therapy. In that study, LEN 18 mg QD + EVE 5 mg QD significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with either monotherapy. In the LEN+EVE cohort, grades 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 71% of pts. We report the design of an ongoing, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study (Study 218) to evaluate if a lower LEN starting dosage regimen provides similar efficacy with a better safety profile than LEN 18 mg + EVE 5 mg (NCT03173560). Methods: Eligible pts are aged ≥ 18 years with advanced clear cell RCC, 1 prior anti-VEGF therapy, ≥ 1 measurable target lesion per RECIST 1.1, a KPS score of ≥ 70, and prior nivolumab is allowed. Pts will receive LEN 18 mg or 14 mg QD + EVE 5 mg QD in 28-day cycles until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The LEN 14-mg dose will be escalated to 18 mg if no intolerable grade 2, or any grade ≥ 3 TEAEs requiring dose reduction occur in cycle 1. The primary endpoints are objective response rate (ORR) at week 24 (ORR24W) and the proportion of pts with intolerable grade 2 and any grade ≥ 3 TEAEs within 24 wks after randomization. Secondary endpoints include PFS and ORR. An estimated 306 pts will be randomized. Sample size is based on detecting noninferiority (NI) of ORR24W and superiority of the primary safety endpoint. Two interim analyses (IA) will be performed when 150 and 200 pts have completed 24 wks of follow-up or discontinue earlier. Each analysis will test NI and futility of the LEN 14-mg arm ORR24W vs the 18-mg arm ORR24W. An O’Brien-Fleming boundary will be used for NI. If the 1-sided P-value is ≤ 0.005 at the first IA, ≤ 0.014 at the second IA, or ≤ 0.045 at the final analysis, then NI in ORR24W will be claimed. If the futility boundary is crossed (ie, 1-sided P-value is ≥ 0.776 at the first IA or ≥ 0.207 at the second IA), then futility will be claimed. Clinical trial information: NCT03173560.

Nivolumab in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Current Trends and Future Perspectives.

Targeted agents form the backbone of most therapeutic strategies in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) but ultimately resistance develops and toxicity often leads to discontinuation of treatment, limiting the clinical benefits of these treatments. Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 anti-PD-1 antibody, selectively blocks the interaction between PD-1 and its ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2 and provides a novel therapy option for patients with aRCC. In 2015, the pivotal phase III study CheckMate 025 led to the Food and Drug Administration approval of nivolumab in patients with aRCC who had received prior anti-angiogenic therapy, and in 2017, the phase III study CheckMate 214 showed that combined immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab resulted in greater objective response rate and prolonged progression-free survival when compared with sunitinib in intermediate- and poor-risk patients with previously untreated aRCC. Early studies of nivolumab in association with anti-angiogenic therapy have generated enthusiasm and multiple combination trials are ongoing.

Clinical activity of nivolumab in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma

BackgroundNivolumab is approved for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) refractory to prior antiangiogenic therapy. The clinical activity of nivolumab in patients with non-clear cell RCC subtypes remains unknown as these patients were excluded from the original nivolumab trials.MethodsPatients from 6 centers in the United States who received at least one dose of nivolumab for non-clear cell mRCC between 12/2015 and 06/2017 were identified. A retrospective analysis including patient characteristics, objective response rate according to RECIST v1.1 and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was undertaken.ResultsForty-one patients were identified. Median age was 58 years (33–82), 71% were male, and majority had ECOG PS 0 (40%) or 1 (47%). Histology included 16 papillary, 14 unclassified, 5 chromophobe, 4 collecting duct, 1 Xp11 translocation and 1 MTSCC (mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma). Among 35 patients who were evaluable for best response, 7 (20%) had PR and 10 (29%) had SD. Responses were observed in unclassified, papillary and collecting duct subtypes. In the entire cohort, median follow-up was 8.5 months and median treatment duration was 3.0 months. Median PFS was 3.5 months and median OS was not reached. Among responders, median time to best response was 5.1 months, and median duration of response was not reached as only 2 out of 7 responders had disease progression during follow-up. TRAEs of any grade were noted in 37% and most commonly included fatigue (12%), fever (10%) and rash (10%). Nivolumab treatments were postponed in 34% and discontinued in 15% of patients due to intolerance. No treatment-related deaths were observed.ConclusionsNivolumab monotherapy demonstrated objective responses and was well tolerated in a heterogeneous population of patients with non-clear cell mRCC. In the absence of other data in this treatment setting, this study lends support to the use of nivolumab for patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Regional Differences in Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarkers for Second-Line Axitinib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From a Randomized Phase II Study

Background: An unmet need exists for treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who progress on or are intolerant to sorafenib. A global randomized phase II trial (ClinicalTrial.gov No. NCT01210495) of axitinib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1-3 inhibitor, in combination with best supportive care (BSC) did not prolong overall survival (OS) over placebo/BSC, but showed improved progression-free survival in some patients. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify potential predictive/prognostic factors. Methods: The data from this phase II study were analyzed for the efficacy and safety of axitinib/BSC in patients from Asia versus non-Asia versus Asian subgroups (Japan, Korea, or mainland China/Hong Kong/Taiwan) and predictive/prognostic values of baseline microRNAs and serum soluble proteins, using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Of 202 patients, 78 were from non-Asia and 124 from Asia (37 Japanese, 36 Korean, and 51 Chinese). No significant differences in OS were found between axitinib/BSC and placebo/BSC in non-Asians, Asians, or Asian subgroups. However, in an exploratory analysis, axitinib/BSC showed favorable OS in Asians, especially Japanese, when patients intolerant to prior antiangiogenic therapy were excluded from the data set. Axitinib/BSC was well tolerated by non-Asians and Asians alike. The presence of 4 circulating microRNAs, including miR-5684 and miR-1224-5p, or a level lower than or equal to the median protein level of stromal cell-derived factor 1 at baseline was significantly associated with longer OS in axitinib/BSC-treated Asians or non-Asians. Conclusions: Axitinib/BSC did not prolong survival over placebo/BSC in non-Asians, Asians, or Asian subgroups, but favorable OS with axitinib/BSC was observed in a subset of Japanese patients. A patient population that excludes sorafenib-intolerant patients might potentially be more suitable for clinical trials of new agents in advanced HCC. Since these results are very preliminary, further investigation is warranted. The potential predictive/prognostic value of several baseline microRNAs and soluble proteins identified in this study would require validation in prospective studies on a large cohort of patients.

Inhibitory effects of compound DMBT on hypoxia-induced vasculogenic mimicry in human breast cancer

Breast cancer is one of the most serious malignant tumors that harm to women’s health. Vasculogenic mimicry (VM) is an alternative type of blood supplement independent of endothelial vessels, which refers to the formation of tumor cell-lined vessels and is associated with tumor invasion, metastasis and poor cancer patient prognosis. Prior antiangiogenic therapy just focused on vascular endothelial cells and did not significantly affect VM. DMBT, 6, 6′-bis (2, 3-dimethoxybenzoyl)-a, a-D-trehalose, has shown to have multiple anti-tumor invasion and metastasis activities; however the exact mechanism is not thoroughly elucidated. In this study, we examined key molecular mechanisms underlying VM by using breast cancer cells MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7. We found that following the hypoxia treatment, the cells were easily to form VM networks and DMBT could inhibit VM formation of both MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells in hypoxic condition. When tumor cells exposed to hypoxia environment, the expression of VM related proteins such as HIF-1α, VE-cadherin, MMP-9, Cdc42, and EGFR, p-Akt, p-mTOR were increased but decreased when exposed to hypoxia medium with DMBT. In MDA-MB-231 cells, DMBT inhibit hypoxia-induced VM by suppress HIF-1α/VE-cadherin/MMPs signaling pathway and in MCF-7 cells, DMBT had little effect on HIF-1α or VE-cadherin but could inhibit cell autophagy to suppress VM formation. These results suggested that DMBT could serve as a therapeutic agent to inhibit VM formation in human breast cancer.

Dual-balloon infusion microcatheter for selective drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization: initial feasibility study.

We aimed to demonstrate feasibility of the use of a dual-balloon infusion microcatheter for segmental/subsegmental drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE). Over a 16-month period, 15 segmental and 21 subsegmental DEB-TACE procedures were attempted using a dual-balloon anti-reflux microcatheter (IsoFlow™ microcatheter, Vascular Designs Inc.) in 21 patients (15 males; median age, 61 years; range, 49-82 years) with hepatocellular carcinoma (Barcelona clinic liver cancer stage A [n=4]; B [n=12]; C [n=5]) with one to three tumors, median size of 3.4 cm (1.2-9 cm). Follow-up enhanced computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging was obtained at one month then subsequently every three months for one year. Technical success was evaluated. Modified RECIST criteria was used for target tumor response assessment. Safety was evaluated by assessing for arterial injury and hepatic injury at the time of the procedure and subsequent evidence of complications and liver toxicity. In 26 of the procedures, the segmental/subsegmental arteries were thought not to be easily selected with standard microcatheters due to the arterial branches being severely tortuous/angulated or atretic from prior TACE or anti-angiogenic therapy or could not be catheterized. Radiologic response assessment of treated tumors demonstrated 32% complete response, 19% partial response, 34% stable disease, and 15% progressive disease. No complications occurred. The median time to progression for the targeted tumors was 7 months (range, 3-12 months). DEB-TACE, using this dual-balloon anti-reflux infusion microcatheter is feasible and safe.

Neutrophil lymphocyte ratio and duration of prior anti-angiogenic therapy as biomarkers in metastatic RCC receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

BackgroundThere is an unmet need to determine factors predictive of clinical benefit, to guide therapeutic sequencing and selection in metastatic RCC (mRCC). We evaluated clinical factors such as the neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and duration of prior anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, as predictors of response rate, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in mRCC patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI).MethodsRegulatory approval was obtained. A single center retrospective chart review of mRCC patients at Karmanos Cancer Institute, treated with ICI based therapy (PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors) was conducted. Data were collected on demographics, smoking status, prognostic scoring (Memorial Sloan Kettering and Heng criteria), NLR pretherapy, post 1 and 4 doses of ICI, and duration of prior anti-VEGF therapy ≥6 months or <6.Results42 patients were evaluated with median age of 61 years (range, 24-85). Pretherapy NLR < 3 and ≥3 was seen in 19 (45%) and 23 (55%) patients, respectively. 24 (57%) and 18 (43%) patients had prior anti-VEGF inhibitors for a duration of ≥6 months and <6 months, respectively. 12 (29%), 22 (52%) and 8 (19%) patients had favorable, intermediate and poor risk disease based on Heng criteria, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed pretherapy NLR ≥3 was predictive of shorter PFS and OS when treated with ICI with median 3.08 months and 13.50 months, respectively, versus 15.57 months and not reached for NLR < 3 (adjusted p-values =0.003 and 0.025, respectively). Prior anti-VEGF therapy <6 months was predictive of increased likelihood of benefit from ICI therapies (adjusted p = 0.028). The median PFS was 3.72 months and 14.33 months, respectively, in cases with prior anti-VEGF therapy for ≥6 months and <6 months.ConclusionPretherapy NLR <3 and duration of prior anti-VEGF therapy of <6 months, are independent statistically significant predictors of longer PFS and OS with ICI therapy in mRCC. Validation is required in a larger sample size with multi-institutional collaboration.

Practical management of adverse events associated with cabozantinib treatment in patients with renal-cell carcinoma.

Cabozantinib is an oral tyrosine-kinase inhibitor whose targets include VEGFR, MET, and AXL. Cabozantinib is approved for the treatment of patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) who have received prior antiangiogenic therapy. In the pivotal Phase III trial of second-line RCC, cabozantinib was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival, progression-free survival, and antitumor response compared with everolimus. Adverse events (AEs) were common for patients receiving cabozantinib, but were effectively managed with supportive care and dose modifications, as discontinuations of cabozantinib due to an AE were infrequent. This article reviews the management of the more common AEs associated with cabozantinib based on findings from the pivotal study, clinical practice guidelines, and the authors’ real-world clinical experience, with support from published literature. We focus on hypertension, palmar–plantar erythrodysesthesia, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, decreased appetite, fatigue, and stomatitis. Effective management of these AEs involves a multimodal strategy that includes patient education, prophylactic and supportive care, and dose modifications. Effective AE management can allow patients to maintain antitumor activity with cabozantinib while mitigating the impact on quality of life.

Hypertension Caused by Lenvatinib and Everolimus in the Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Multikinase inhibitors (MKI) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors prolong progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) by reducing angiogenesis and tumor growth. In this regard, the MKI lenvatinib and the mTOR inhibitor everolimus proved effective when applied alone, but more effective when they were administered combined. Recently, both drugs were included in clinical trials, resulting in international clinical guidelines for the treatment of mRCC. In May 2016, lenvatinib was approved by the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the use in combination with everolimus, as treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma following one prior antiangiogenic therapy. A major problem of treating mRCC with lenvatinib and everolimus is the serious adverse event (AE) of arterial hypertension. During the treatment with everolimus and lenvatinib combined, 42% of the patients developed hypertension, while 10% of the patients treated with everolimus alone and 48% of the of the lenvatinib only treated patients developed hypertension. Lenvatinib carries warnings and precautions for hypertension, cardiac failure, and other adverse events. Therefore, careful monitoring of the patients is necessary.

Overall survival and updated progression-free survival results from a randomized phase 2 trial comparing the combination of olaparib and cediranib against olaparib alone in recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

5535 Background: We previously reported that the combination of cediranib (ced) and olaparib (olap) improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rates (ORR) in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive (plat-sens) high-grade serous (HGS) or BRCA-related ovarian cancer (OvCa) (NCT 01116648). We conducted an updated PFS and overall survival (OS) analysis. Methods: Patients (pts) across 9 centers were randomized 1:1 in this Ph 2 open label study to Olap (olap 400 mg capsules BID) or Ced/Olap (olap 200 mg capsules BID; ced 30 mg daily), stratified by BRCA status and prior anti-angiogenic therapy. Eligibility included pts with recurrent plat-sens HGS or BRCA-related OvCa. Pts had measurable disease by RECIST 1.1, PS 0 or 1, and the ability to take POs. No prior anti-angiogenics in the recurrent setting or prior PARP inhibitor was allowed. PFS was defined as time from randomization to radiographic progression or death. OS was defined as time from randomization to death. Results: Pts were enrolled from Oct 2011 to Jun 2013: 46 to Olap, 44 to Ced/Olap. 48 pts were known BRCA carriers (25 Olap; 23 Ced/Olap). As of Dec 21, 2016, 67 pts had a PFS event, and 52 pts had an OS event. Updated median PFS was 8.2 mos for Olap and 16.5 mos for Ced/Olap (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.30-0.83, p=0.007). Median OS was 33.3 mos for Olap and 44.2 mos for Ced/Olap (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.36-1.11, p=0.11). Within known germline BRCA mut carriers, updated PFS was 16.5 vs 16.4 mos (HR 0.75, p=0.42), and OS was 40.1 vs 44.2 mos (HR 0.79, p=0.55) for Olap and Ced/Olap, respectively. In pts without known germline BRCA mut, updated PFS was 5.7 vs 23.7 mos (HR 0.32, p=0.002), and OS was 23.0 vs 37.8 mos (HR 0.48, p=0.074). Conclusions: Updated PFS results consistently demonstrated that Ced/Olap significantly extended PFS compared to Olap in the overall population of women with plat-sens OvCa. In this Phase 2 study not powered to detect OS diferences, there was a trend towards OS improvement with Ced/Olap, particularly in pts without a known germline BRCA mutation. Results from ongoing studies of this oral combination in OvCa are of clinical interest. Clinical trial information: NCT 01116648.

Epacadostat plus pembrolizumab in patients with advanced RCC: Preliminary phase I/II results from ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037.

4515 Background: Epacadostat (E) is a potent oral inhibitor of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1), a tryptophan-catabolizing enzyme that induces immune tolerance by T-cell suppression. Preclinical and clinical data suggest that epacadostat has antitumor activity when combined with checkpoint inhibitors, including the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab (P). ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037 is an ongoing open-label, phase 1/2 (P1/2) study evaluating E + P in multiple tumor types. We report preliminary P1/2 efficacy and safety data for the advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) cohort as of a 29OCT2016 data cutoff. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had advanced clear-cell RCC, prior antiangiogenic therapy (tx), and no prior checkpoint inhibitor tx. In P1 dose escalation (3+3+3), pts received E (25, 50, 100, or 300 mg PO BID) + P (2 mg/kg or 200 mg IV Q3W); MTD was not exceeded. E (100 mg BID) + P (200 mg Q3W) dosing was selected for P2 cohort expansion. Response was assessed in RECIST 1.1 evaluable pts. Safety/tolerability was assessed in pts receiving ≥1 E + P dose. Results: 33 pts (P1, n = 11; P2, n = 22) were enrolled (median age, 63 years; 70% men; 97% white; MSKCC criteria of favorable, intermediate, and poor in 6%, 64%, and 12% of pts, respectively). Of 30 efficacy-evaluable pts, 63% (n = 19) had 0–1 prior tx and 37% (n = 11) had ≥2 prior tx for advanced disease. ORR (CR+PR) and DCR (CR+PR+SD) for pts with 0–1 prior tx was 47% (9/19; 1 CR, 8 PR) and 58% (11/19; 1 CR, 8 PR, 2 SD), respectively; for pts with ≥2 prior tx, ORR and DCR were 0% and 36% (4/11; all SD). At data cutoff, 9/9 responses were ongoing (range, 1+ to 372+ days). PFS and biomarker analyses are ongoing. TRAEs occurring in ≥10% of the 33 pts included fatigue and rash (36% each); and arthralgia, diarrhea, pruritus, and pyrexia (12% each). Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 15% of pts (none in &gt; 1 pt). Two pts discontinued due to TRAEs (grade 3 autoimmune hepatitis, n = 1; grade 3 aseptic meningitis/headache/nausea/vomiting/anxiety, n = 1). Conclusions: E + P was generally well tolerated and associated with encouraging response outcomes in advanced RCC pts with 0–1 prior line of tx. E + P represents a novel immunotherapeutic strategy. A phase 3 RCC study is planned. Clinical trial information: NCT02178722.

Nivolumab treatment for patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective analysis.

4586 Background: Nivolumab (Nivo) is approved for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) refractory to prior antiangiogenic therapy. However, the clinical activity of Nivo in non-clear cell RCC subtypes remains unknown as these patients were not part of the trial population. Methods: Patients (pts) from 3 centers who received at least one dose of Nivo as monotherapy for mRCC between 12/2015 and 01/2017 were identified. All patients had histologically-confirmed non-clear cell histology. A retrospective analysis focusing on patient and treatment characteristics, objective response according to RECIST v1.1 and adverse events (AEs) was undertaken. Results: Twenty-three patients were identified. Median age was 59 years (33-82), 78% were male, 61% were white, 30% black and 9% Hispanic. MSKCC risk groups were 19% favorable, 67% intermediate, 14% poor. Most common histologies were Unclassified (48%) and Papillary (44%), followed by Collecting duct and Mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma (MTSCC) (4% each). The majority of pts had ECOG PS 0 (57%) or 1 (33%). At diagnosis, 65% had metastatic disease; most common sites were lung (57%), retroperitoneal lymph nodes (35%), and liver or bone (26% each). Most pts (74%) had prior nephrectomy and had received one (74%) or &gt; 1 (26%) prior systemic therapy, most commonly sunitinib (65%), pazopanib (30%) or axitinib (17%). No pts had prior IL-2, but one pt had atezolizumab on trial. After a median follow-up of 6.5 months (mos) and 8 Nivo doses, median PFS was 4.2 mos and median OS was not reached. Among 21 pts evaluable for best response, 6 (29%) had PR and 4 (19%) had SD. Median time to best response was 5.1 mos. At the time of analysis, 9 pts were still on Nivo, 2 were on treatment break, 8 pts had subsequent treatment after PD on Nivo, and 2 were lost to follow-up. Two of 23 pts died. Most common AEs ( &gt; 10%, any grade) were fever (13%) and fatigue (13%). Nivo treatments were postponed in 6 pts due to intolerance and stopped in3 pts. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: Nivolumab monotherapy demonstrated a substantial objective response rate and was well tolerated in a heterogeneous population of treatment-refractory patients who had mRCC with non-clear cell histology.

Cabozantinib for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Current and Future Paradigms.

Cabozantinib was approved by the FDA in April 2016 for the treatment of advanced renal cancer, pretreated with at least one prior antiangiogenic therapy. This is the first agent in the therapy of kidney cancer to show a statistically significant improvement in all three endpoints of clinical efficacy, response rate, progression free survival, and overall survival (OS), in a phase III randomized trial. The reporting of METEOR coincided with that of the Checkmate 025 study which randomized similarly eligible patients to receive nivolumab or everolimus 10mg daily. As the drug development has occurred in parallel for cabozantinib and nivolumab, no evidence exists for decision making regarding optimal sequencing of these agents. A third option of lenvatinib and everolimus was also rapidly approved based on a phase II randomized trial demonstrating promising magnitude of improvement in response, progression-free survival (PFS), and OS. The differences in toxicity profiles, duration and toxicities of prior therapy, presence of brain metastases, concomitant immunosuppressive therapies, or autoimmune conditions are the factors that are taken into account when choosing therapy. The patients who have demonstrated response, prolonged clinical benefit and tolerability, and with anti-VEGF therapy are likely to benefit from continued antiangiogenic activity combined with MET and HGF inhibition with cabozantinib at progression. The patients who have intolerance or poor response to anti-VEGF TKI should be switched to nivolumab as the preferential therapy of choice. Clearly, better predictors are required to aid in guiding therapeutic decisions. The CABOSUN trial will likely shift the entire paradigm. The CABOSUN trial demonstrated superior PFS and response rates favoring cabozantinib as compared to sunitinib in untreated, intermediate, or poor-risk RCC and can be predicted to become the front-line therapy of choice. Immune-based regimens such as the combinations of nivolumab+ipilimumab and bevacizumab+atezolizumab have completed phase III trials, comparing to sunitinib, and results are awaited. In the future, a similar clinical dilemma will be shifted to the front-line therapy and the nuances of trial eligibility, and patient comorbidities will remain important factors. Optimal sequencing and predictive biomarkers are the questions that need to be incorporated in future clinical trials within RCC.

Lenvatinib for use in combination with everolimus for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma following one prior anti-angiogenic therapy

ABSTRACTIntroduction: In patients with mRCC options for second line therapies, following progression on anti-angiogenic agents, that demonstrate a survival advantage in clinical trials have been limited. Recently a number of agents have demonstrated efficacy in this setting. Here in we profile one such therapy, the combination of lenvatinib and everolimus, and discuss the expanded options for therapy available in this setting.Areas covered: In this review, we discuss current algorithms for treatment of mRCC in both the first-line and second-line setting. We discuss the recent addition of cabozantinib and nivolumab, in the second line setting, to the market. Lenvatinib’s pharmacology, clinical efficacy and toxicity profile is discussed. A comprehensive literature review was performed using PUBMED.Expert commentary: The current treatment algorithms for mRCC will likely see significant change in the coming years. The addition of immunotherapy to our treatment options in mRCC is of particular importance. Future trials examining the use of immunotherapy, both as monotherapy and in combination with VEGF targeted therapy, will likely be a dominant influence in the therapeutic landscape of mRCC. Progress in terms of the rapid expansion of available active therapies in mRCC needs to be balanced with current deficiencies in terms of predictive biomarkers.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approval: Cabozantinib for the Treatment of Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

On April 25, 2016, the FDA approved cabozantinib (Cabometyx; Exelixis, Inc.) for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in patients who have received prior antiangiogenic therapy. The approval was based on data from one randomized, open-label, multicenter study in which patients with RCC who had received prior antiangiogenic therapy were treated with either cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily (n = 330) or everolimus 10 mg orally once daily (n = 328). The major efficacy outcome measure was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by a blinded independent radiology review committee in the first 375 randomized patients. A statistically significant improvement in PFS was seen, with a median PFS of 7.4 and 3.8 months in the cabozantinib and everolimus arms, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45-0.74; P < 0.0001]. At a second interim analysis, a statistically significant improvement in overall survival (OS) in the intent-to-treat population was also demonstrated, with a median OS of 21.4 and 16.5 months in the cabozantinib and everolimus arms, respectively (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.83; P = 0.0003). The most common (greater than or equal to 25%) adverse reactions included diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, hypertension, vomiting, weight loss, and constipation. Clin Cancer Res; 23(2); 330-5. ©2016 AACR.

Cabozantinib: A Review in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

The multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) cabozantinib (Cabometyx™) is approved in the USA for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who have received prior antiangiogenic therapy. In the EU, cabozantinib is indicated for the treatment of advanced RCC in adults following prior vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy. In adults with advanced or metastatic clear-cell RCC who had previously received VEGF receptor (VEGFR) TKIs, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly prolonged in patients who received oral cabozantinib versus oral everolimus in the pivotal METEOR trial. Objective response was achieved in a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving cabozantinib than those receiving everolimus. Cabozantinib had a manageable adverse events profile in patients with advanced RCC. Thus, cabozantinib is an important new option for use in patients with advanced RCC who have previously received antiangiogenic therapy.

Cabozantinib for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma

ABSTRACTIntroduction: Agents that target the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway as well as the PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab are standard therapies for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Recently, cabozantinib, an inhibitor of MET, VEGF receptors, and AXL, was approved by the FDA and European Commission based on improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) compared to standard of care treatment with everolimus in a randomized phase 3 trial in advanced RCC after prior VEGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy.Areas covered:The preclinical development and scientific rationale, pharmacokinetics, and clinical efficacy and safety of cabozantinib for the treatment of advanced RCC are reviewed. The use of cabozantinib in clinical practice with the growing number of available treatments for advanced RCC is discussed.Expert opinion: Cabozantinib is the only therapy for advanced RCC that has improved PFS, ORR, and OS in a pivotal phase 3 trial after prior antiangiogenic therapy. While no clinical trials have been published comparing cabozantinib with another TKI, available clinical data suggest it could be the most efficacious TKI for second-line therapy. Preliminary encouraging results have also been reported in a phase 2 trial in untreated poor- and intermediate- risk patients with RCC, indicating that treatment with cabozantinib may also be beneficial in the first-line setting.

PCN44 - Epidemiological Estimation and Flow of Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Who Have Received Prior Anti-Angiogenic Therapy in Spain

PCN44 - Epidemiological Estimation and Flow of Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Who Have Received Prior Anti-Angiogenic Therapy in Spain

Phase I study of PF-03446962, a fully human monoclonal antibody against activin receptor-like kinase-1, in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

This expansion cohort of a multicenter, dose-escalation, phase I study (NCT00557856) evaluated safety, tolerability, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamic effects of the anti-activin receptor-like kinase-1 (ALK-1) monoclonal antibody PF-03446962 in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Patients with HCC and disease progression after prior antiangiogenic therapy or intolerance to treatment received PF-03446962 7 mg/kg intravenously biweekly, as recommended in the dose-escalation part of the study. Twenty-four patients received PF-03446962. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were thrombocytopenia (33.3%), asthenia (29.2), and chills (16.7%). Two patients experienced treatment-related telangiectasia, suggesting an in vivo knockout of ALK-1 function through ALK-1 pathway inhibition. Overall, treatment-related grade 3-4 AEs were reported in eight patients (33.3%). Treatment-related grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was noted in four patients. No complete or partial responses were reported. Twelve (50%) patients achieved stable disease, which lasted ≥12 weeks in seven (29.2%) patients. The median time to progression was 3 months. Biomarker analyses showed higher mean tumor expression of c-tumor mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor and higher mean serum levels of bone morphogenetic protein-9 in patients with disease control (DC) for ≥12 weeks versus patients with disease progression. Conversely, lower mean serum transforming growth factor-β and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-3 levels were detected in patients with DC versus patients with progression. The observed safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic profile, and clinical activity support further evaluation of PF-03446962 in patients with HCC and other solid malignancies, as single agent or in combination with other antiangiogenic, chemotherapeutic, or immunotherapeutic agents. NCT00557856.

Reduced Periprocedural Analgesia After Replacement of Water for Injection with Glucose 5% Solution as the Infusion Medium for 90Y-Resin Microspheres.

Forty-one patients who received 77 radioembolization procedures with G5 (2014-2015) were retrospectively matched with 41 patients (77 radioembolization procedures) who received radioembolization with WFI (2011-2014) at our center. The need for on-demand pain medication was chosen as an objective and accessible measure of periprocedural pain experienced by patients. Patients were well matched according to sex, age, tumor type and involvement, and prior antiangiogenic therapies. Periinterventional analgesic requirements were significantly lower for radioembolization procedures performed with G5 than WFI: 5 of 77 (6.5%) versus 29 of 77 (37.7%), P ≤ 0,001, respectively. Early stasis (defined as slowed antegrade flow, before total vascular stasis) occurred in 12 of 154 (7.8%) radioembolization procedures overall and was not different (P ≤ 0.229) between the 2 groups (4/77 [5.2%] vs. 8/77 [10.4%]). Slow pulsatile administration of 90Y-resin microspheres with WFI is associated with a low rate of stasis. Replacement of WFI with G5 significantly reduces the need for periprocedural analgesia. These data favor the use G5 for 90Y-resin microsphere implantation in daily practice.