Department of Medicine, Genitourinary Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave., New York, NY 10021, USA.
N Engl J Med. 2013 Aug 22;369(8):722-31. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1303989.
Pazopanib and sunitinib provided a progression-free survival benefit, as compared with placebo or interferon, in previous phase 3 studies involving patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. This phase 3, randomized trial compared the efficacy and safety of pazopanib and sunitinib as first-line therapy.
We randomly assigned 1110 patients with clear-cell, metastatic renal-cell carcinoma, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive a continuous dose of pazopanib (800 mg once daily; 557 patients) or sunitinib in 6-week cycles (50 mg once daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks without treatment; 553 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by independent review, and the study was powered to show the noninferiority of pazopanib versus sunitinib. Secondary end points included overall survival, safety, and quality of life.
Pazopanib was noninferior to sunitinib with respect to progression-free survival (hazard ratio for progression of disease or death from any cause, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.22), meeting the predefined noninferiority margin (upper bound of the 95% confidence interval, <1.25). Overall survival was similar (hazard ratio for death with pazopanib, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.08). Patients treated with sunitinib, as compared with those treated with pazopanib, had a higher incidence of fatigue (63% vs. 55%), the hand-foot syndrome (50% vs. 29%), and thrombocytopenia (78% vs. 41%); patients treated with pazopanib had a higher incidence of increased levels of alanine aminotransferase (60%, vs. 43% with sunitinib). The mean change from baseline in 11 of 14 health-related quality-of-life domains, particularly those related to fatigue or soreness in the mouth, throat, hands, or feet, during the first 6 months of treatment favored pazopanib (P<0.05 for all 11 comparisons).
Pazopanib and sunitinib have similar efficacy, but the safety and quality-of-life profiles favor pazopanib. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals; COMPARZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00720941.).
在既往涉及转移性肾细胞癌患者的 3 期研究中,与安慰剂或干扰素相比,帕唑帕尼和舒尼替尼提供了无进展生存期获益。这项 3 期、随机试验比较了帕唑帕尼和舒尼替尼作为一线治疗的疗效和安全性。
我们将 1110 例透明细胞、转移性肾细胞癌患者以 1:1 的比例随机分配,接受连续剂量的帕唑帕尼(800 mg 每日 1 次;557 例)或舒尼替尼 6 周周期治疗(50 mg 每日 1 次,连用 4 周,随后 2 周无治疗;553 例)。主要终点为独立评估的无进展生存期,该研究的目的是证明帕唑帕尼不劣于舒尼替尼。次要终点包括总生存期、安全性和生活质量。
帕唑帕尼在无进展生存期方面不劣于舒尼替尼(疾病进展或任何原因死亡的风险比,1.05;95%置信区间[CI],0.90 至 1.22),符合预设的非劣效性边界(95%CI 的上限,<1.25)。总生存期相似(帕唑帕尼死亡风险比,0.91;95%CI,0.76 至 1.08)。与接受帕唑帕尼治疗的患者相比,接受舒尼替尼治疗的患者更易发生乏力(63% vs. 55%)、手足综合征(50% vs. 29%)和血小板减少症(78% vs. 41%);接受帕唑帕尼治疗的患者更易发生丙氨酸氨基转移酶水平升高(60% vs. 43%接受舒尼替尼治疗)。在治疗的前 6 个月中,有 11 个健康相关生活质量领域中的 14 个领域的平均基线变化倾向于帕唑帕尼,特别是与乏力或口、喉、手或脚酸痛相关的领域(11 项比较均 P<0.05)。
帕唑帕尼和舒尼替尼具有相似的疗效,但安全性和生活质量方面帕唑帕尼更具优势。(由葛兰素史克公司提供资金;COMPARZ ClinicalTrials.gov 编号,NCT00720941)。