RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma has been revolutionised by targeted therapy with drugs that block angiogenesis. So far, no phase 3 randomised trials comparing the effectiveness of one targeted agent against another have been reported. We did a randomised phase 3 study comparing axitinib, a potent and selective second-generation inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors, with sorafenib, an approved VEGF receptor inhibitor, as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. METHODS: We included patients coming from 175 sites (hospitals and outpatient clinics) in 22 countries aged 18 years or older with confirmed renal clear-cell carcinoma who progressed despite first-line therapy containing sunitinib, bevacizumab plus interferon-alfa, temsirolimus, or cytokines. Patients were stratified according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and type of previous treatment and then randomly assigned (1:1) to either axitinib (5 mg twice daily) or sorafenib (400 mg twice daily). Axitinib dose increases to 7 mg and then to 10 mg, twice daily, were allowed for those patients without hypertension or adverse reactions above grade 2. Participants were not masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and was assessed by a masked, independent radiology review and analysed by intention to treat. This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00678392. FINDINGS: A total of 723 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive axitinib (n=361) or sorafenib (n=362). The median PFS was 6·7 months with axitinib compared to 4·7 months with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·665; 95% CI 0·544-0·812; one-sided p<0·0001). Treatment was discontinued because of toxic effects in 14 (4%) of 359 patients treated with axitinib and 29 (8%) of 355 patients treated with sorafenib. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea, hypertension, and fatigue in the axitinib arm, and diarrhoea, palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia, and alopecia in the sorafenib arm. INTERPRETATION: Axitinib resulted in significantly longer PFS compared with sorafenib. Axitinib is a treatment option for second-line therapy of advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Pfizer Inc.
Assuntos
Inibidores da Angiogênese/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Benzenossulfonatos/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Imidazóis/uso terapêutico , Indazóis/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Piridinas/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Inibidores da Angiogênese/efeitos adversos , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Axitinibe , Benzenossulfonatos/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Humanos , Imidazóis/efeitos adversos , Indazóis/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Niacinamida/análogos & derivados , Compostos de Fenilureia , Piridinas/efeitos adversos , Receptores de Fatores de Crescimento do Endotélio Vascular/antagonistas & inibidores , Sorafenibe , Adulto JovemRESUMO
We recently proposed a new bioinformatic algorithm called OncoFinder for quantifying the activation of intracellular signaling pathways. It was proved advantageous for minimizing errors of high-throughput gene expression analyses and showed strong potential for identifying new biomarkers. Here, for the first time, we applied OncoFinder for normal and cancerous tissues of the human bladder to identify biomarkers of bladder cancer. Using Illumina HT12v4 microarrays, we profiled gene expression in 17 cancer and seven non-cancerous bladder tissue samples. These experiments were done in two independent laboratories located in Russia and Canada. We calculated pathway activation strength values for the investigated transcriptomes and identified signaling pathways that were regulated differently in bladder cancer (BC) tissues compared with normal controls. We found, for both experimental datasets, 44 signaling pathways that serve as excellent new biomarkers of BC, supported by high area under the curve (AUC) values. We conclude that the OncoFinder approach is highly efficient in finding new biomarkers for cancer. These markers are mathematical functions involving multiple gene products, which distinguishes them from "traditional" expression biomarkers that only assess concentrations of single genes.