From the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Baylor Sammons Cancer Center-Texas Oncology, PA, Dallas, TX; Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH; Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD; Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; University of Wisconsin Paul P. Carbone Comprehensive Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Pfizer Global Research and Development, La Jolla; City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; Klinika Onkologii Oddzial Chemioterapii, Poznan; Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw; Wojewodzka Przychodnia Onkolog, Gdansk, Poland; Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Paris; Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and Institut Catalá d'Oncologia, Barcelona, Spain.
J Clin Oncol. 2023 Apr 10;41(11):1965-1971. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.02623.
A randomized, phase III trial demonstrated superiority of sunitinib over interferon alfa (IFN-α) in progression-free survival (primary end point) as first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Final survival analyses and updated results are reported.
Seven hundred fifty treatment-naïve patients with metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily on a 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off dosing schedule or to IFN-α 9 MU subcutaneously thrice weekly. Overall survival was compared by two-sided log-rank and Wilcoxon tests. Progression-free survival, response, and safety end points were assessed with updated follow-up.
Median overall survival was greater in the sunitinib group than in the IFN-α group (26.4 21.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.821; 95% CI, 0.673 to 1.001; = .051) per the primary analysis of unstratified log-rank test ( = .013 per unstratified Wilcoxon test). By stratified log-rank test, the HR was 0.818 (95% CI, 0.669 to 0.999; = .049). Within the IFN-α group, 33% of patients received sunitinib, and 32% received other vascular endothelial growth factor-signaling inhibitors after discontinuation from the trial. Median progression-free survival was 11 months for sunitinib compared with 5 months for IFN-α ( < .001). Objective response rate was 47% for sunitinib compared with 12% for IFN-α ( < .001). The most commonly reported sunitinib-related grade 3 adverse events included hypertension (12%), fatigue (11%), diarrhea (9%), and hand-foot syndrome (9%).
Sunitinib demonstrates longer overall survival compared with IFN-α plus improvement in response and progression-free survival in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC. The overall survival highlights an improved prognosis in patients with RCC in the era of targeted therapy.
一项随机、III 期临床试验表明,舒尼替尼在无进展生存期(主要终点)方面优于干扰素-α(IFN-α),成为转移性肾细胞癌(RCC)的一线治疗药物。本文报告了最终的生存分析和更新结果。
750 名未经治疗的转移性透明细胞 RCC 患者被随机分配至舒尼替尼 50mg 口服,每日一次,4 周为一个周期,其中 2 周停药,或 IFN-α 9MU 皮下注射,每周 3 次。采用双侧对数秩和 Wilcoxon 检验比较总生存期。更新随访评估无进展生存期、反应和安全性终点。
舒尼替尼组的中位总生存期长于 IFN-α组(分别为 26.4 21.8 个月;风险比[HR] = 0.821;95%CI,0.673 至 1.001; =.051),根据未分层对数秩检验的主要分析( =.013 未分层 Wilcoxon 检验)。分层对数秩检验 HR 为 0.818(95%CI,0.669 至 0.999; =.049)。在 IFN-α 组中,33%的患者在试验停药后接受了舒尼替尼治疗,32%的患者接受了其他血管内皮生长因子信号抑制剂治疗。舒尼替尼组的中位无进展生存期为 11 个月,而 IFN-α 组为 5 个月(<.001)。舒尼替尼的客观缓解率为 47%,而 IFN-α 为 12%(<.001)。舒尼替尼相关的最常见的 3 级不良事件包括高血压(12%)、疲劳(11%)、腹泻(9%)和手足综合征(9%)。
与 IFN-α 加用相比,舒尼替尼在转移性 RCC 患者的一线治疗中表现出更长的总生存期,且反应和无进展生存期得到改善。在靶向治疗时代,总生存期突出了 RCC 患者的预后改善。