Suppr超能文献

阿昔替尼与索拉非尼用于一线转移性肾细胞癌的疗效比较:一项随机III期试验的总生存期研究

Axitinib Versus Sorafenib in First-Line Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Overall Survival From a Randomized Phase III Trial.

作者信息

Hutson Thomas E, Al-Shukri Salman, Stus Viktor P, Lipatov Oleg N, Shparyk Yaroslav, Bair Angel H, Rosbrook Brad, Andrews Glen I, Vogelzang Nicholas J

机构信息

Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center, Dallas, and US Oncology Research, Houston, TX.

Urological Department, First Saint-Petersburg State Pavlov Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation.

出版信息

Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017 Feb;15(1):72-76. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2016.05.008. Epub 2016 May 27.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In a randomized phase III trial in treatment-naive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), axitinib versus sorafenib yielded numerically longer progression-free survival (median, 10.1 vs. 6.5 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 1-sided P = .038) and significantly higher objective response rate (32% vs. 15%; 1-sided P = .0006). In this article, we report overall survival (OS) and updated safety results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Previously untreated patients with metastatic RCC (n = 288), stratified according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS; 0 vs. 1), were randomized 2:1 to receive axitinib 5 mg twice per day (b.i.d.; n = 192) or sorafenib 400 mg b.i.d. (n = 96).

RESULTS

Median OS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 21.7 months (18.0-31.7) with axitinib versus 23.3 months (18.1-33.2) with sorafenib (stratified HR, 0.995; 95% CI, 0.731-1.356; 1-sided P = .4883). Among patients with ECOG PS of 0, median OS was numerically longer with axitinib than with sorafenib (41.2 vs. 31.9 months; HR, 0.811, 1-sided P = .1748), whereas among patients with ECOG PS 1, median OS was shorter with axitinib than with sorafenib (14.2 vs. 19.8 months; HR, 1.203; 1-sided; P = .7973). Incidence and severity of common adverse events were consistent with previous reports.

CONCLUSION

OS was similar between axitinib and sorafenib in treatment-naive patients with metastatic RCC, and no new safety signals emerged.

摘要

背景

在一项针对初治转移性肾细胞癌(RCC)患者的随机III期试验中,阿昔替尼与索拉非尼相比,无进展生存期在数值上更长(中位数分别为10.1个月和6.5个月;风险比[HR]为0.77;单侧P = 0.038),客观缓解率显著更高(32%对15%;单侧P = 0.0006)。在本文中,我们报告总生存期(OS)和更新后的安全性结果。

患者与方法

既往未接受治疗的转移性RCC患者(n = 288),根据东部肿瘤协作组体能状态(ECOG PS;0对1)进行分层,按2:1随机分组,分别接受阿昔替尼5 mg每日两次(b.i.d.;n = 192)或索拉非尼400 mg b.i.d.(n = 96)。

结果

阿昔替尼组的中位OS(95%置信区间[CI])为21.7个月(18.0 - 31.7),索拉非尼组为23.3个月(18.1 - 33.2)(分层HR为0.995;95% CI为0.731 - 1.356;单侧P = 0.4883)。在ECOG PS为0的患者中,阿昔替尼组的中位OS在数值上长于索拉非尼组(41.2个月对31.9个月;HR为0.811,单侧P = 0.1748),而在ECOG PS为1的患者中,阿昔替尼组的中位OS短于索拉非尼组(14.2个月对19.8个月;HR为1.203;单侧P = 0.7973)。常见不良事件的发生率和严重程度与既往报告一致。

结论

在初治转移性RCC患者中,阿昔替尼和索拉非尼的OS相似,且未出现新的安全性信号。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验