Activity and safety of sunitinib in poor risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients

Purpose To assess the activity, safety and treatment patterns of sunitinib in patients with poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed the charts of poor risk patients treated with sunitinib from October 2006 to July 2013 who met the eligibility criteria. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Tumor radiological response was measured according to RECIST 1.1 and adverse events (AEs) were assessed through standard criteria. Results Median OS was 8.16 months (95% CI, 5.73-10.59). Of the 53 patients included in this analysis, 9 (17.0%) achieved partial response, 12 (22.6%) had stable disease. Median treatment duration was 3.30 months (95% CI: 1.96-4.63) and 26.4% of patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 39.6% of patients, the most common being fatigue (15.1%), neutropenia (9.5%), nausea, vomiting and diarrhea (7.5% each). Discussion Sunitinib may benefit some unselected poor-risk patients, although the rates of AEs and drug discontinuation suggest a need for careful patient monitoring. .

Activity and safety of sunitinib in poor risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

PURPOSE: To assess the activity, safety and treatment patterns of sunitinib in patients with poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of poor risk patients treated with sunitinib from October 2006 to July 2013 who met the eligibility criteria. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Tumor radiological response was measured according to RECIST 1.1 and adverse events (AEs) were assessed through standard criteria. RESULTS: Median OS was 8.16 months (95% CI, 5.73-10.59). Of the 53 patients included in this analysis, 9 (17.0%) achieved partial response, 12 (22.6%) had stable disease. Median treatment duration was 3.30 months (95% CI: 1.96-4.63) and 26.4% of patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 39.6% of patients, the most common being fatigue (15.1%), neutropenia (9.5%), nausea, vomiting and diarrhea (7.5% each). DISCUSSION: Sunitinib may benefit some unselected poor-risk patients, although the rates of AEs and drug discontinuation suggest a need for careful patient monitoring.

Formal statistical testing and inference in randomized phase II trials in medical oncology.

OBJECTIVES: With the growing number of new anticancer therapies, randomized phase II trials have been used more often in oncology. Although the primary objective of such trials is not to formally compare results between arms, this practice seems frequent. We sought to quantify the frequency of use of formal statistical testing or inference through the use of P values and confidence intervals (CIs) in randomized phase II trials. METHODS: We searched PubMed for randomized phase II trials assessing systemic cancer therapies published in the years 1995/1996 and 2005/2006. For each study, 2 reviewers independently abstracted data, including reporting of P values and CIs for the primary endpoint. RESULTS: We retrieved 288 articles, 107 of which were eligible for analysis. The median number of patients per trial was 94, the primary endpoint was response rate in 71 (66.4%) cases, and a control arm was present in 55 (51.4%) trials. Either P values or CIs for the primary endpoint were reported in 85 (79.4%; 95% CI, 70.8%-86.1%) cases. Year of publication, source of funding, and use of a control group were not associated with this practice. CONCLUSIONS: Formal statistical comparisons between arms of randomized phase II trials are frequently undertaken in medical oncology. The extent to which such a practice abrogates phase III testing is unknown.

Salvage radiotherapy for biochemical relapse after complete PSA response following radical prostatectomy: outcome and prognostic factors for patients who have never received hormonal therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the results of salvage conformal radiation therapy (3DC-EBRT) for patients submitted to radical prostatectomy (RP) who have achieved complete PSA response and who have never been treated with hormonal therapy (HT).To present the results of biochemical control, a period free from hormonal therapy and factors related to its prognosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: from August 2002 to December 2004, 43 prostate cancer patients submitted to RP presented biochemical failure after achieving a PSA < 0.2 ng/ml. They have never received HT and were submitted to salvage 3DC-EBRT. Median age was 62 years, median preoperative PSA was 8.8 ng/ml, median Gleason Score was 7. Any PSA rise above 0.2 was defined as biochemical failure after surgery. Median 3DC-EBRT dose was 70 Gy, biochemical failure after EBRT was defined as 3 consecutive rises in PSA or a single rise enough to trigger HT. RESULTS: 3-year biochemical non-evidence of disease (BNED) was 71%. PSA doubling time lower than 4 months (p = 0.01) and time from recurrence to salvage EBRT (p = 0.04) were associated with worse chance of biochemical control. Biochemical control of 76% was achieved when RT had been introduced with a PSA lower than 1 ng/ml vs. 48% with a PSA higher than 1 (p = 0.19). Late toxicity was acceptable. CONCLUSION: 70% of biochemical control in 3 years can be achieved with salvage radiotherapy in selected patients. The importance of PSADT was confirmed in this study and radiotherapy should be started as early as possible. Longer follow up is necessary, but it is possible to conclude that a long interval free from hormonal therapy was achieved with low rate of toxicity avoiding or at least delaying several important adverse effects related to hormonal treatment.

Biochemical Relapse for Prostate Cancer Following Radical Prostatectomy: Salvage Radiotherapy Without HormonalTherapy

Objectives: This paper aims to study biochemical control, hormonal therapy-free survival, and prognostic factors related tosalvage radiation for prostate cancer patients submitted to radical prostatectomy (RP) without hormonal therapy (HT) before orduring radiation. Materials and Methods: from August 2002 to July 2004, 39 prostate cancer patients submitted to RPpresented biochemical failure after achieving PSA nadir (<0.2ng/ml). All patients were submitted to three-dimensional conformalexternal beam radiation therapy (3DC-EBRT) and no patients had received HT. Median age was 62 years, median preoperativePSA was 9.4ng/ml, median Gleason Score was 7. We defined PSA rise above 0.2 as biochemical failure after surgery. Median3DC-EBRT dose was 70Gy, and biochemical failure after EBRT was defined as three consecutive rises in PSA or a single risesufficient to trigger HT. Results: Biochemical non-evidence of disease (BNED) in 3 years was 72%. PSA doubling time (PSADT)lower than 4 months (p=0.04), and delay to salvage EBRT (p=0.05) were associated to worse chance of successful salvagetherapy. Late morbidity was acceptable. Conclusion: Expressive PSA control (72% BNED / 3years) could be achieved withsalvage radiotherapy in well-selected patients. The importance of PSADT was confirmed, and radiotherapy should be started asearly as possible. Follow-up is somewhat short, but it is possible to conclude that it is possible to achieve a long interval freefrom hormonal therapy with low rate of toxicity, avoiding or at least delaying morbidity related to hormonal treatment.radiotherapy