Results From a Randomized Phase II Trial of Sunitinib and Gemcitabine or Sunitinib in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma with Sarcomatoid Features: ECOG-ACRIN E1808.

INTRODUCTION: Sarcomatoid renal cancer (sRCC) patients have poor outcomes. EA1808 evaluated sunitinib and gemcitabine (SG) and sunitinib alone (S) in sRCC in a randomized cooperative group phase II trial (NCT01164228). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pts were aggregated 1:1 to SG (45 pts) or S (40 pts) using a 2-stage design. sRCC pts with ≤ 1 prior nonvascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitor were stratified into prognostic groups: good (clear cell, < 20% sarcomatoid, PS 0), intermediate (20%-50% sarcomatoid, PS 0), and poor (nonclear cell or > 50% sarcomatoid or PS 1). The primary endpoint was response rate (RR). For SG, the null RR was 15% and a 30% RR was of interest. For S, a 20% RR was of interest vs. a 5% null rate. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Both arms met protocol criteria for stage 2 of accrual. A total of 47 pts were randomized to SG and 40 to S. The SG arm had 9 of 45 evaluable patient responses (RR of 20%; CI = [13%-31%]) not meeting the predetermined threshold for success. The sunitinib arm met its endpoint with 6/37 (RR of 16%; CI = [9%-27%]) evaluable responses. Grade ≥ 3 events were experienced by 36 in the SG arm and 17 in the sunitinib arm CONCLUSIONS: EA1808 was the largest and first randomized cytotoxic trial for sarcomatoid RCC. Sunitinib alone but not the SG met the preset threshold of success. Cytotoxic chemotherapy is only useful in limited clinical scenarios for sRCC.

Predicting Disease Recurrence, Early Progression, and Overall Survival Following Surgical Resection for High-risk Localized and Locally Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) relies heavily on retrospective models, limiting their generalizability to contemporary cohorts. OBJECTIVE: To introduce a contemporary RCC prognostic model, developed using prospective, highly annotated data from a phase III adjuvant trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The model utilizes outcome data from the ECOG-ACRIN 2805 (ASSURE) RCC trial. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome for the model is disease-free survival (DFS), with overall survival (OS) and early disease progression (EDP) as secondary outcomes. Model performance was assessed using discrimination and calibration tests. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 1735 patients were included in the analysis, with 887 DFS events occurring over a median follow-up of 9.6 yr. Five common tumor variables (histology, size, grade, tumor necrosis, and nodal involvement) were included in each model. Tumor histology was the single most powerful predictor for each model outcome. The C-statistics at 1 yr were 78.4% and 81.9% for DFS and OS, respectively. Degradation of the DFS, DFS validation set, and OS model's discriminatory ability was seen over time, with a global c-index of 68.0% (95% confidence interval or CI [65.5, 70.4]), 68.6% [65.1%, 72.2%], and 69.4% (95% CI [66.9%, 71.9%], respectively. The EDP model had a c-index of 75.1% (95% CI [71.3, 79.0]). CONCLUSIONS: We introduce a contemporary RCC recurrence model built and internally validated using prospective and highly annotated data from a clinical trial. Performance characteristics of the current model exceed available prognostic models with the added benefit of being histology inclusive and TNM agnostic. PATIENT SUMMARY: Important decisions, including treatment protocols, clinical trial eligibility, and life planning, rest on our ability to predict cancer outcomes accurately. Here, we introduce a contemporary renal cell carcinoma prognostic model leveraging high-quality data from a clinical trial. The current model predicts three outcome measures commonly utilized in clinical practice and exceeds the predictive ability of available prognostic models.

Local Recurrence Following Resection of Intermediate-High Risk Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Anatomical Classification and Analysis of the ASSURE (ECOG-ACRIN E2805) Adjuvant Trial.

PURPOSE: We describe what is to our knowledge a novel classification system for local recurrence after surgery of renal cell carcinoma. We assessed its prognostic implications using prospective, randomized controlled data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried the ASSURE (Sunitinib Malate or Sorafenib Tosylate in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer That Was Removed By Surgery) (ECOG-ACRIN [Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network] E2805) trial data for patients with fully resected, intermediate-high risk, nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma with local recurrence. We used certain definitions, including type I-single recurrence in a remnant kidney or ipsilateral renal fossa, type II-single recurrence in the ipsilateral vasculature, the ipsilateral adrenal gland or a lymph node, type III-single recurrence in other intra-abdominal soft tissues or organs and type IV-any combination of types I-III or multiple recurrences of a single type. Multivariable logistic regression and the log rank test were performed to identify clinicopathological predictors and compare survival, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 1,943 patients 300 (15.4%) had local recurrence, which was type I, II, III and IV in 66 (22.0%), 97 (32.3%), 87 (29.0%) and 50 (16.7%), respectively. Surgical modality (minimally invasive vs open) and type of surgery (partial vs radical) did not predict any local recurrence. Five-year cancer specific survival and overall survival were worse in patients with type IV recurrence (each p <0.001). There was no difference in survival among patients with types I to III recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intermediate-high risk nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma local recurrence appears to be a function of biology more than of surgical modality or surgery type. The prognosis for solitary intra-abdominal local recurrences appear similar regardless of location (types I-III). Local recurrences involving multiple sites and/or subdivisions are associated with worse survival (type IV).

Angiogenic Factor and Cytokine Analysis among Patients Treated with Adjuvant VEGFR TKIs in Resected Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The use of VEGFR TKIs for the adjuvant treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains controversial. We investigated the effects of adjuvant VEGFR TKIs on circulating cytokines in the ECOG-ACRIN 2805 (ASSURE) trial. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with resected high-risk RCC were randomized to sunitinib, sorafenib, or placebo. Plasma from 413 patients was analyzed from post-nephrectomy baseline, 4 weeks, and 6 weeks after treatment initiation. Mixed effects and Cox proportional hazards models were used to test for changes in circulating cytokines and associations between disease-free survival (DFS) and cytokine levels. RESULTS: VEGF and PlGF increased after 4 weeks on sunitinib or sorafenib (P < 0.0001 for both) and returned to baseline at 6 weeks on sunitinib (corresponding to the break in the sunitinib schedule) but not sorafenib (which was administered continuously). sFLT-1 decreased after 4 weeks on sunitinib and 6 weeks on sorafenib (P < 0.0001). sVEGFR-2 decreased after both 4 and 6 weeks of treatment on sunitinib or sorafenib (P < 0.0001). Patients receiving placebo had no significant changes in cytokine levels. CXCL10 was elevated at 4 and 6 weeks on sunitinib and sorafenib but not on placebo. Higher baseline CXCL10 was associated with worse DFS (HR 1.41 per log increase in CXCL10, Bonferroni-adjusted P = 0.003). This remained significant after adjustment for T-stage, Fuhrman grade, and ECOG performance status. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with adjuvant VEGFR TKIs for RCC, drug-host interactions mediate changes in circulating cytokines. Elevated baseline CXCL10 was associated with worse DFS. Studies to understand functional consequences of these changes are under way.

Predicting Renal Cancer Recurrence: Defining Limitations of Existing Prognostic Models With Prospective Trial-Based Validation.

PURPOSE: To validate currently used recurrence prediction models for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) by using prospective data from the ASSURE (ECOG-ACRIN E2805; Adjuvant Sorafenib or Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Carcinoma) adjuvant trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eight RCC recurrence models (University of California at Los Angeles Integrated Staging System [UISS]; Stage, Size, Grade, and Necrosis [SSIGN]; Leibovich; Kattan; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center [MSKCC]; Yaycioglu; Karakiewicz; and Cindolo) were selected on the basis of their use in clinical practice and clinical trial designs. These models along with the TNM staging system were validated using 1,647 patients with resected localized high-grade or locally advanced disease (≥ pT1b grade 3 and 4/pTanyN1Mo) from the ASSURE cohort. The predictive performance of the model was quantified by assessing its discriminatory and calibration abilities. RESULTS: Prospective validation of predictive and prognostic models for localized RCC showed a substantial decrease in each of the predictive abilities of the model compared with their original and externally validated discriminatory estimates. Among the models, the SSIGN score performed best (0.688; 95% CI, 0.686 to 0.689), and the UISS model performed worst (0.556; 95% CI, 0.555 to 0.557). Compared with the 2002 TNM staging system (C-index, 0.60), most models only marginally outperformed standard staging. Importantly, all models, including TNM, demonstrated statistically significant variability in their predictive ability over time and were most useful within the first 2 years after diagnosis. CONCLUSION: In RCC, as in many other solid malignancies, clinicians rely on retrospective prediction tools to guide patient care and clinical trial selection and largely overestimate their predictive abilities. We used prospective collected adjuvant trial data to validate existing RCC prediction models and demonstrate a sharp decrease in the predictive ability of all models compared with their previous retrospective validations. Accordingly, we recommend prospective validation of any predictive model before implementing it into clinical practice and clinical trial design.

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and impaired renal function: PrE1003, a PrECOG study.

Renal insufficiency is common in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and can often limit choice of therapy. Lenalidomide, a critical agent in the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma, is renally cleared., This phase I/II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide with dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and renal insufficiency. Three groups were treated, with creatinine clearance 30-60 cc/hr (group A), CrCl < 30 not on dialysis (group B), and patients on dialysis (group C) at escalating doses of lenalidomide. A total of 63 patients were treated and no DLTs were observed in phase I. All three groups were able to escalate to full dose lenalidomide 25 mg daily 21/28 days, although due to reduced accrual the phase II component was not entirely completed for groups B and C. Adverse events were as expected, including anemia, diarrhea and fatigue. Ten patients experienced grade 3-4 pneumonia. Overall response rate was 54% across all groups. PFS was 7.5 months and OS was 19.7 months. Lenalidomide can be given at full dose 25 mg daily 21/28 in patients with a CrCl > 30, and can be given daily to those with CrCl < 30, even when on dialysis, at doses of at least 15 mg daily.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Fulvestrant Plus Everolimus or Placebo in Postmenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer Resistant to Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy: Results of PrE0102.

Purpose The mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus targets aberrant signaling through the PI3K/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin pathway, a mechanism of resistance to anti-estrogen therapy in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. We hypothesized that everolimus plus the selective ER downregulator fulvestrant would be more efficacious than fulvestrant alone in ER-positive metastatic breast cancer resistant to aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Patients and Methods This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II study included 131 postmenopausal women with ER-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, AI-resistant metastatic breast cancer randomly assigned to fulvestrant (500 mg days 1 and 15 of cycle 1, then day 1 of cycles 2 and beyond) plus everolimus or placebo. The study was designed to have 90% power to detect a 70% improvement in median progression-free survival from 5.4 months to 9.2 months. Secondary end points included objective response and clinical benefit rate (response or stable disease for at least 24 weeks). Prophylactic corticosteroid mouth rinses were not used. Results The addition of everolimus to fulvestrant improved the median progression-free survival from 5.1 to 10.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.92]; stratified log-rank P = .02), indicating that the primary trial end point was met. Objective response rates were similar (18.2% v 12.3%; P = .47), but the clinical benefit rate was significantly higher in the everolimus arm (63.6% v 41.5%; P = .01). Adverse events of all grades occurred more often in the everolimus arm, including oral mucositis (53% v 12%), fatigue (42% v 22%), rash (38% v 5%), anemia (31% v. 6%), diarrhea (23% v 8%), hyperglycemia (19% v 5%), hypertriglyceridemia (17% v 3%), and pneumonitis (17% v 0%), although grade 3 to 4 events were uncommon. Conclusion Everolimus enhances the efficacy of fulvestrant in AI-resistant, ER-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Longitudinal and dynamic measurement invariance of the FACIT-Fatigue scale: an application of the measurement model of derivatives to ECOG-ACRIN study E2805.

PURPOSE: While quality of life measures may be used to assess meaningful change and group differences, their scaling and validation often rely on a single occasion of measurement. Using the 13-item FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire at three timepoints, this study tests whether individual items change together in ways consistent with a general fatigue factor. METHODS: The measurement model of derivatives (MMOD) is a novel method for measurement evaluation that directly assesses whether a given factor structure accurately describes how individual test items change over time. MMOD transforms item-level longitudinal data into a set of orthogonal change scores, each one representing either a within-person longitudinal mean or a different type of longitudinal change. These change scores are then factor analyzed and tested for invariance. This approach is applied to the FACIT-Fatigue scale in a sample of patients with renal cell carcinoma treated on 'ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (ECOG-ACRIN) study 2805. RESULTS: Analyses revealed strong evidence of unidimensionality, and apparent factorial invariance using traditional techniques. MMOD revealed a small but statistically significant difference in factor structure ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), where factor loadings were weaker and more variable for measuring longitudinal change. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in factor structure were not large enough to substantially affect scale usage in this application, but they do reveal some variability across items in the FACIT-Fatigue in their ability to detect change. Future applications should consider differential sensitivity of individual items in multi-item scales, and perhaps even capitalize upon these differences by selecting items that are more sensitive to change.

Fatigue among patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib: patient-reported outcomes of ECOG-ACRIN E2805 trial.

BACKGROUND: E2805 was a phase III trial to test whether adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib could improve disease-free survival compared to placebo in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO), focusing on fatigue, were evaluated as a secondary endpoint. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 463 patients participated in the PRO study. Fatigue was measured by the FACIT Fatigue scale and PROMIS Fatigue SF1 measure at baseline, week 10, and week 22. The primary endpoint was change in fatigue score from baseline to week 22, measured by the FACIT Fatigue scale. Secondarily, the psychometric properties of PROMIS Fatigue SF1 were assessed in relation to the FACIT Fatigue scale. RESULTS: Fatigue got significantly worse on all arms after 2 cycles of treatment, and especially so in patients on sunitinib (- 9.6 vs. - 5.6 on sorafenib vs. - 4.7 on placebo). Fatigue remained stable during week 10 and week 22. Overall, the mean score change between baseline and week 22 was - 7.9 (p < 0.001) on sunitinib, - 6.4 (p < 0.001) on sorafenib and - 5.6 (p < 0.001) on placebo arm. The difference in score change was not statistically significant between the two experimental arms and the placebo arm (difference = - 2.34 [p = 0.110] and - 0.87 [p = 0.535] for sunitinib vs. placebo and sorafenib vs. placebo). PROMIS Fatigue SF1 had good internal consistency reliability and construct and criterion validity, and was highly correlated with the FACIT Fatigue scale score. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue got worse during study period, especially in patients on sunitinib. The PROMIS Fatigue SF1 was highly correlated with FACIT Fatigue and produced similar results.

Phase 2 Study of Weekly Paclitaxel Plus Estramustine in Metastatic Hormone-Refractory Prostate Carcinoma: ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E1898) Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This multicenter phase 2 study assessed the combination of estramustine and weekly paclitaxel with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We enrolled 77 patients who had received no prior chemotherapy for CRPC between 1998 and 2000; a total of 74 subjects were eligible for the study. Each 8-week cycle included paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 provided intravenously weekly for 6 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off therapy and oral estramustine 280 mg twice daily for 3 days beginning 24 hours before the first dose of paclitaxel. The primary end point was rate of objective or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response at 16 weeks. A 50% response rate was considered of further interest. RESULTS: Eligible patients received a median of 3 cycles (range, 1-10 cycles). The response rate among patients with measurable disease was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19-52). The PSA response rate was 58% (95% CI, 47-70). Clinical benefit rate was 45% (95% CI, 33-57). The median progression-free survival was 5.9 months (95% CI, 4.4-6.7). The median overall survival was 17.6 months (95% CI, 14.6-20.8). The most common clinical grade 3/4 toxicities were fatigue (14%) and sensory neuropathy (7%). Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities included lymphopenia (21%) and anemia (9%). There was one toxicity-related death. Quality-of-life scores improved by week 8, but the change was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The combination has activity defined by PSA declines in CRPC but did not meet the protocol-specified end point for efficacy as defined by objective response rate. Since this study was conducted, more effective, better-tolerated regimens have been developed.

Tumor Microvessel Density as a Prognostic Marker in High-Risk Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated on ECOG-ACRIN E2805.

Purpose: Increased vascularity is a hallmark of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Microvessel density (MVD) is one measurement of tumor angiogenesis; however, its utility as a biomarker of outcome is unknown. ECOG-ACRIN 2805 (E2805) enrolled 1,943 resected high-risk RCC patients randomized to adjuvant sunitinib, sorafenib, or placebo. We aimed to determine the prognostic and predictive role of MVD in RCC.Experimental Design: We obtained pretreatment primary RCC nephrectomy tissues from 822 patients on E2805 and constructed tissue microarrays. Using quantitative immunofluorescence, we measured tumor MVD as the area of CD34-expressing cells. We determined the association with disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), treatment arm, and clinicopathologic variables.Results: High MVD (above the median) was associated with prolonged OS for the entire cohort (P = 0.021) and for patients treated with placebo (P = 0.028). The association between high MVD and OS was weaker in patients treated with sunitinib or sorafenib (P = 0.060). MVD was not associated with DFS (P = 1.00). On multivariable analysis, MVD remained independently associated with improved OS (P = 0.013). High MVD correlated with Fuhrman grade 1-2 (P < 0.001), clear cell histology (P < 0.001), and absence of necrosis (P < 0.001) but not with gender, age, sarcomatoid features, lymphovascular invasion, or tumor size.Conclusions: High MVD in resected high-risk RCC patients is an independent prognostic, rather than predictive, biomarker of improved OS. Further studies should assess whether incorporating MVD into clinical models will enhance our ability to predict outcome and if low MVD can be used for selection of high-risk patients for adjuvant therapy trials. Clin Cancer Res; 24(1); 217-23. ©2017 AACR.

Association between patients' perception of the comorbidity burden and symptoms in outpatients with common solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients' symptom burden is commonly attributed to their cancer and treatment. Increasingly, cancer patients have many other chronic comorbid conditions. However, the degree to which these comorbid conditions may contribute to the patient-reported symptom burden is unclear. METHODS: This study explored the relations between the presence of comorbid conditions, the symptom experience and burden, and the perceived bother from cancer or comorbid conditions in 3106 cancer patients. The associations between the number of comorbidities (identified from current medications), the patient-reported symptom burden (the number of symptoms scored as ≥7 on the 13-item MD Anderson Symptom Inventory physical scale), the patient-reported bother from comorbid conditions and from cancer (from "not at all" to "extremely"), and the clinician-reported difficulty in caring for patients' symptoms were examined. RESULTS: According to medication lists, 19% of the patients had at least 5 of 12 comorbid conditions. Approximately 39% rated at least 1 symptom as ≥ 7, and this proportion increased with an increasing number of comorbid conditions (48% with ≥ 5 comorbid conditions vs 36% with 1 comorbid condition). One-third of the patients reported moderate or worse bother, and this was significantly associated with an increased number of comorbid conditions (odds ratio [OR], 2.4) and an increased symptom burden (OR, 1.22). Clinician ratings of difficulty in managing patients' symptoms were significantly associated with bother from cancer (OR, 2.0), comorbid conditions (OR, 1.6), and symptom burden (OR, 1.1). CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidity is common in cancer patients and is associated with a greater symptom burden and clinician reports of difficulty in managing patients' symptoms. Greater attention to comorbid conditions is needed to optimize the symptom management of cancer patients with multimorbidity. Cancer 2017;123:3835-3842. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

A Randomized Phase II Study to Determine the Effect of 2 Different Doses of Aflibercept in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (ECOG-ACRIN [E4805]).

BACKGROUND: Aflibercept is a recombinantly produced fusion protein that has potent anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) activity. We tested whether aflibercept has clinical activity in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). The recommended phase II dose was 4 mg/kg but several patients (pts) treated at 1 mg/kg showed prolonged progression-free survival. We therefore tested both doses in a parallel group randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible pts had histologically confirmed advanced or metastatic ccRCC and previous treatments included exposure to a VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Pts received aflibercept (either 1 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg) on day 1 of a 14-day cycle until disease progression. Pts randomized to 1 mg/kg could crossover to 4 mg/kg at the time of disease progression. The primary end point was proportion alive and progression-free at 8 weeks. A Simon 2-stage design was used for each arm with 33 and 24 eligible pts per arm enrolled in stages 1 and 2. RESULTS: Ninety-four pts were enrolled, 59 and 35 to 4 mg and 1 mg doses, respectively. Seventy-two percent had 1 previous treatment most commonly sunitinib. Sixteen eligible pts crossed over at the time of disease progression to the 4-mg dose. Most common adverse events were hypertension, proteinuria, and fatigue. Only 4 pts reported Grade 4 or higher toxicity. With 36 of 59 pts (61%) progression-free at 8 weeks, the 4-mg/kg dose met protocol-specified efficacy criteria. CONCLUSION: Aflibercept is active in previously treated ccRCC and might be worthy of further study.

Adjuvant Treatment for High-Risk Clear Cell Renal Cancer: Updated Results of a High-Risk Subset of the ASSURE Randomized Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Given recently published results of a 750-patient adjuvant sunitinib trial showing improved disease-free survival (DFS), the appropriate strategy for treating high-risk patients is unclear. We sought to determine whether there is improved disease-free survival benefit to taking the active drug in patients with high-risk (pT3, pT4, node-positive) clear cell renal cancer (ccRCC) in the ASSURE trial (adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib vs placebo in resected unfavorable renal cell carcinoma [RCC]), the largest adjuvant trial published to date. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate DFS and overall survival (OS) in ccRCC high-risk patients randomized to sunitinib or sorafenib vs placebo among patients with stages comparable to other high-risk adjuvant trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The DFS and OS at 10 years postactivation were calculated for 1069 patients in US and Canadian cooperative groups with high-risk patients who had ccRCC histology and pT3, pT4, or node-positive disease accrued between 2006 and 2010 to the double-blind randomized placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Outcome analyses by dose quartiles of these patients receiving sunitinib or sorafenib were also performed. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received 1 year of adjuvant sunitinib (50 mg), sorafenib (800 mg) daily, or equivalent placebo. The study was amended for patient intolerance to sunitinib (37.5 mg), sorafenib (400 mg) daily, or equivalent placebo with mandatory dose escalation if no serious adverse effects were experienced. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Disease-free survival, defined as time from randomization to recurrence, second primary cancer, or death. RESULTS: Of 1069 patients, 358 (243 [67.9%] men, 115 [32.1%] women) received sunitinib, 355 (248 [69.9%] men, 107 [30.1%] women) received sorafenib, and 356 (254 [71.3%] men, 102 [28.7%] women) received placebo as adjuvant therapy. The mean (SD) age for each group was 58.3 (10.6) years, 56.8 (10.3) years, and 57.5 (10.4) years, respectively. Five-year DFS rates were 47.7%, 49.9%, and 50.0%, respectively for sunitinib, sorafenib, and placebo (HR, 0.94 for sunitinib vs placebo; and HR, 0.90; 97.5% CI, 0.71-1.14 for sorafenib vs placebo), with 5-year OS of 75.2%, 80.2%, and 76.5% (HR, 1.06; 97.5% CI, 0.78-1.45; P = .66, sunitinib vs placebo; and HR, 0.80; 97.5% CI, 0.58-1.11; P = .12 for sorafenib vs placebo). There was no difference by dose quartile. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neither prognostic category of the tumor nor dose intensity of therapy altered the lack of difference in DFS or OS in this population of patients with high-risk ccRCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00326898.

Association of fatigue and depression with circulating levels of proinflammatory cytokines and epidermal growth factor receptor ligands: a correlative study of a placebo-controlled fatigue trial.

CONTEXT: The biology of fatigue and depression in cancer patients is poorly understood. Hypotheses regarding cytokines and growth factors related to sickness behavior and disruption of circadian signaling have been proposed. OBJECTIVES: We prospectively examined proinflammatory cytokines (e.g., sickness behavior model) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) ligands (e.g., circadian disruption model) in the serum of cancer patients enrolled in a clinical trial testing levocarnitine for fatigue. METHODS: Serum samples were collected at baseline and week 4. Cytokine/growth factor analyses were performed with a Luminex analyzer. The Brief Fatigue Index and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Index were used to measure fatigue and depression severity. The association between cytokine and symptoms was examined using logistic models. RESULTS: Among 101 analyzable patients, all ten cytokines/growth factors examined were highly elevated at baseline and all significantly decreased at week 4 (p<0.001) regardless of treatment intervention. At baseline, the odds of severe fatigue significantly increased for patients with higher level of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra), whereas patients with higher levels of IL-1Ra, tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, interferon-γ, transforming growth factor α, and vascular endothelial growth factor had higher odds of severe depression. At week 4, fatigue (p=0.023) and depression (p=0.007) responders had less decrease in IL-1 level than the corresponding non-responders. CONCLUSION: In this correlative analysis of a fatigue clinical trial, levels of fatigue were significantly associated with levels of IL-1 and IL-1Ra. Circadian-signaling pathways related to EGFR signaling were correlated with depression as were other cytokines. A major placebo effect was associated with a global decrease in cytokine and growth factors. These data provide further basis for testing hypotheses regarding the mechanisms of fatigue and depression in cancer patients.

Lack of Patient-Clinician Concordance in Cancer Patients: Its Relation With Patient Variables.

CONTEXT: Patients with cancer are bothered by its diagnosis, treatment, and associated uncertainty. Lack of concordance (LOC) of patients' reporting of their symptoms and quality of life (QOL) with that of their clinicians has been observed in cancer care. However, information regarding the reporting of patients' bother due to aspects of cancer experience and their clinicians' assessment is lacking. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to describe cancer patients' bother due to aspects of their disease experience and explore the concordance (LOC) or a lack thereof between patients' and clinicians' reporting of patients' bother and factors associated with it. METHODS: Data from a prospective study of cancer patients' symptoms were analyzed. LOC was defined as any discrepancy between patient-clinician pairs in reporting patients' bother due to disease, cancer treatment, comorbidity, and side effects of symptom management. The relation of LOC to patients' QOL and distress was also explored. RESULTS: Of the 2597 patients analyzed, a perfect concordance was observed in 37%-42%. Clinicians underestimated the severity of bother in 62%-76% of discordant cases. LOC was significantly associated with patient-reported distress and poor QOL. Referral for symptom management was associated with the clinician's rating of patients' bother, and LOC was associated with likelihood of poor compliance with recommendations for symptom management. CONCLUSION: Majority of clinicians tended to underestimate cancer patients' bother, and this was associated with poor QOL of cancer patients and their distress. Future studies should examine the LOC and its correlates to confirm the results of this study.

Enrollment Trends and Disparity Among Patients With Lung Cancer in National Clinical Trials, 1990 to 2012.

Purpose Under-representation of elderly, women, and racial/ethnic minority patients with cancer in clinical trials is of national concern. The goal of this study was to characterize enrollment trends and disparities by age, sex, and race/ethnicity in lung cancer trials. Methods We analyzed data for 23,006 National Cancer Institute cooperative group lung cancer trial participants and 578,476 patients with lung cancer from the SEER registry from 1990 to 2012. The enrollment disparity difference (EDD) and enrollment disparity ratio (EDR) were calculated on the basis of the proportion of each subgroup in the trial population and the US lung cancer population. Annual percentage changes (APCs) in the subgroup proportions in each population were compared over time. Results Enrollment disparity for patients ≥ 70 years of age with non-small-cell lung cancer improved from 1990 to 2012 (test of parallelism, P = .020), with a remaining EDD of 0.22 (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.25) and EDR of 1.65 (95% CI, 1.51 to 1.82) in 2010 to 2012. No improvement was seen for elderly patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), with an APC of 0.20 ( P = .714) among trial participants, despite a rising proportion of elderly patients with SCLC in the US population (APC, 0.32; P = .020). Enrollment disparity for women with lung cancer improved overall, with the gap closing by 2012 (EDD, 0.03 [95% CI, 0.00 to 0.06]; EDR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.16]). Enrollment disparities persisted without significant improvement for elderly women, blacks, Asians/Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics. Conclusion Under-representation in lung cancer trials improved significantly from 1990 to 2012 for elderly patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and for women, but ongoing efforts to improve the enrollment of elderly patients with SCLC and minorities are needed. Our study highlights the importance of addressing enrollment disparities by demographic and disease subgroups to better target under-represented groups of patients with lung cancer.

Extramedullary Disease in Adult Acute Myeloid Leukemia Is Common but Lacks Independent Significance: Analysis of Patients in ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group Trials, 1980-2008.

Purpose Extramedullary disease (EMD) at diagnosis in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been recognized for decades. Reported herein are results from a large study of patients with AML who were treated in consecutive ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group frontline clinical trials in an attempt to define the incidence and clinical implications of EMD. Methods Patients with newly diagnosed AML, age 15 years and older, who were treated in 11 clinical trials, were studied to identify EMD, as defined by physical examination, laboratory findings, and imaging results. Results Of the 3,522 patients enrolled, 282 were excluded, including patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia, incorrect diagnosis, or no adequate assessment of EMD at baseline. The overall incidence of EMD was 23.7%. The sites involved were: lymph nodes (11.5%), spleen (7.3%), liver (5.3%), skin (4.5%), gingiva (4.4%), and CNS (1.1%). Most patients (65.3%) had only one site of EMD, 20.9% had two sites, 9.5% had three sites, and 3.4% had four sites. The median overall survival was 1.035 years. In univariable analysis, the presence of any EMD ( P = .005), skin involvement ( P = .002), spleen ( P < .001), and liver ( P < .001), but not CNS ( P = .34), nodal involvement ( P = .94), and gingival hypertrophy ( P = .24), was associated with a shorter overall survival. In contrast, in multivariable analysis, adjusted for known prognostic factors such as cytogenetic risk and WBC count, neither the presence of EMD nor the number of specific sites of EMD were independently prognostic. Conclusion This large study demonstrates that EMD at any site is common but is not an independent prognostic factor. Treatment decisions for patients with EMD should be made on the basis of recognized AML prognostic factors, irrespective of the presence of EMD.

Adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib for high-risk, non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (ECOG-ACRIN E2805): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Renal-cell carcinoma is highly vascular, and proliferates primarily through dysregulation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. We tested sunitinib and sorafenib, two oral anti-angiogenic agents that are effective in advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in patients with resected local disease at high risk for recurrence. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients at 226 study centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients had pathological stage high-grade T1b or greater with completely resected non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma and adequate cardiac, renal, and hepatic function. Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computerised double-blind randomisation was done centrally with permuted blocks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 54 weeks of sunitinib 50 mg per day orally throughout the first 4 weeks of each 6 week cycle, sorafenib 400 mg twice per day orally throughout each cycle, or placebo. Placebo could be sunitinib placebo given continuously for 4 weeks of every 6 week cycle or sorafenib placebo given twice per day throughout the study. The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival between each experimental group and placebo in the intention-to-treat population. All treated patients with at least one follow-up assessment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326898. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2006, and Sept 1, 2010, 1943 patients from the National Clinical Trials Network were randomly assigned to sunitinib (n=647), sorafenib (n=649), or placebo (n=647). Following high rates of toxicity-related discontinuation after 1323 patients had enrolled (treatment discontinued by 193 [44%] of 438 patients on sunitinib, 199 [45%] of 441 patients on sorafenib), the starting dose of each drug was reduced and then individually titrated up to the original full doses. On Oct 16, 2014, because of low conditional power for the primary endpoint, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and the results be released. The primary analysis showed no significant differences in disease-free survival. Median disease-free survival was 5·8 years (IQR 1·6-8·2) for sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 97·5% CI 0·85-1·23, p=0·8038), 6·1 years (IQR 1·7-not estimable [NE]) for sorafenib (HR 0·97, 97·5% CI 0·80-1·17, p=0·7184), and 6·6 years (IQR 1·5-NE) for placebo. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (105 [17%] patients on sunitinib and 102 [16%] patients on sorafenib), hand-foot syndrome (94 [15%] patients on sunitinib and 208 [33%] patients on sorafenib), rash (15 [2%] patients on sunitinib and 95 [15%] patients on sorafenib), and fatigue 110 [18%] patients on sunitinib [corrected]. There were five deaths related to treatment or occurring within 30 days of the end of treatment; one patient receiving sorafenib died from infectious colitis while on treatment and four patients receiving sunitinib died, with one death due to each of neurological sequelae, sequelae of gastric perforation, pulmonary embolus, and disease progression. Revised dosing still resulted in high toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant treatment with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib or sunitinib showed no survival benefit relative to placebo in a definitive phase 3 study. Furthermore, substantial treatment discontinuation occurred because of excessive toxicity, despite dose reductions. These results provide a strong rationale against the use of these drugs for high-risk kidney cancer in the adjuvant setting and suggest that the biology of cancer recurrence might be independent of angiogenesis. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Pfizer, and Bayer.

Atrasentan in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Phase 2 Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E6800).

BACKGROUND: Atrasentan, an oral endothelin receptor A antagonist, demonstrated phase 1 activity in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). A phase 2 study was undertaken in patients with measurable or bone-only metastatic RCC in the pre-VEGF/TKI era. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were stratified by disease status and prior immunotherapy. Eligible patients had no prior chemotherapy, 0 to 1 prior immunotherapies, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2. Patients received atrasentan 10 mg per day until progression. The primary end point was progression-free (PF) rate at 6 months. Rates of 25% among patients treated with prior immunotherapy and 45% among patients with no prior immunotherapy were considered promising. A 2-stage design was used for cohorts without prior immunotherapy. RESULTS: From 2003 to 2005, 98 patients were registered. Median treatment duration was 9.9 weeks (range, 0.3-107 weeks). Toxicities were mild; 71% of patients reported no grade 3 or higher treatment-related events. Grade 4 events included neutropenia (n = 3), dyspnea (n = 2), thrombosis (n = 1), and arrhythmia (n = 1). Two grade 5 events (dyspnea and constitutional) were possibly treatment related. Six-month PF rates (90% confidence interval) were 14% (6-25), 0% (0-39), 8% (1-23), and 22% (8-44), respectively, for patients with prior immunotherapy/measurable disease (n = 44), prior immunotherapy/bone metastases (n = 6), no prior immunotherapy/measurable disease (n = 25), and no prior immunotherapy/bone metastases (n = 18). Median PF survival was 2.3 months (95% confidence interval, 2.0-3.5 months). CONCLUSION: Although well tolerated, atrasentan did not yield 6-month PF rates supporting its use as first-line monotherapy in patients with advanced RCC.