Molecular characterization of renal cell carcinoma tumors from a phase III anti-angiogenic adjuvant therapy trial.

Multigene assays can provide insight into key biological processes and prognostic information to guide development and selection of adjuvant cancer therapy. We report a comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic analysis of tumor samples from 171 patients at high risk for recurrent renal cell carcinoma post nephrectomy from the S-TRAC trial (NCT00375674). We identify gene expression signatures, including STRAC11 (derived from the sunitinib-treated population). The overlap in key elements captured in these gene expression signatures, which include genes representative of the tumor stroma microenvironment, regulatory T cell, and myeloid cells, suggests they are likely to be both prognostic and predictive of the anti-angiogenic effect in the adjuvant setting. These signatures also point to the identification of potential therapeutic targets for development in adjuvant renal cell carcinoma, such as MERTK and TDO2. Finally, our findings suggest that while anti-angiogenic adjuvant therapy might be important, it may not be sufficient to prevent recurrence and that other factors such as immune response and tumor environment may be of greater importance.

A Phase Ib Study of Axitinib in Combination with Crizotinib in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer or Other Advanced Solid Tumors.

LESSONS LEARNED: The combination of axitinib and crizotinib has a manageable safety and tolerability profile, consistent with the profiles of the individual agents when administered as monotherapy.The antitumor activity reported here for the combination axitinib/crizotinib does not support further study of this combination treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma given the current treatment landscape. BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors have been successfully used to treat metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC); however, resistance eventually develops in most cases. Tyrosine protein kinase Met (MET) expression increases following VEGF inhibition, and inhibition of both has shown additive effects in controlling tumor growth and metastasis. We therefore conducted a study of axitinib plus crizotinib in advanced solid tumors and mRCC. METHODS: This phase Ib study included a dose-escalation phase (starting doses: axitinib 3 mg plus crizotinib 200 mg) to estimate maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in patients with solid tumors and a dose-expansion phase to examine preliminary efficacy in treatment-naïve patients with mRCC. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and biomarkers were also assessed. RESULTS: No patients in the dose-escalation phase (n = 22) experienced dose-limiting toxicity; MTD was estimated to be axitinib 5 mg plus crizotinib 250 mg. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were hypertension (18.2%) and fatigue (9.1%). In the dose-expansion phase, overall response rate was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9-54.3), and progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% CI, 3.5-not reached). CONCLUSION: The combination of axitinib plus crizotinib, at estimated MTD, had a manageable safety profile and showed evidence of modest antitumor activity in mRCC.

Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Sunitinib in Patients with High-Risk Renal Cell Carcinoma: Exploratory Pharmacogenomic Analysis.

PURPOSE: In the S-TRAC trial, adjuvant sunitinib prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) versus placebo in patients with loco-regional renal cell carcinoma at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. An exploratory analysis evaluated associations between SNPs in several angiogenesis- or hypoxia-related genes and clinical outcomes in S-TRAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Blood samples were genotyped for 10 SNPs and one insertion/deletion mutation using TaqMan assays. DFS was compared using log-rank tests for each genotype in sunitinib versus placebo groups and between genotypes within each of three (sunitinib, placebo, and combined sunitinib plus placebo) treatment groups. P values were unadjusted. RESULTS: In all, 286 patients (sunitinib, n = 142; placebo, n = 144) were genotyped. Longer DFS [HR; 95% confidence interval (CI)] was observed with sunitinib versus placebo for VEGFR1 rs9554320 C/C (HR 0.44; 95% CI, 0.21-0.91; P = 0.023), VEGFR2 rs2071559 T/T (HR 0.46; 95% CI, 0.23-0.90; P = 0.020), and eNOS rs2070744 T/T (HR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30-0.94; P = 0.028). Shorter DFS was observed for VEGFR1 rs9582036 C/A versus C/C with sunitinib, placebo, and combined therapies (P ≤ 0.05), and A/A versus C/C with sunitinib (P = 0.022). VEGFR1 rs9554320 A/C versus A/A was associated with shorter DFS in the placebo (P = 0.038) and combined (P = 0.006) groups. CONCLUSIONS: Correlations between VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 SNPs and longer DFS with sunitinib suggest germline SNPs are predictive of improved outcomes with adjuvant sunitinib in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Independent validation studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Regional Differences in Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarkers for Second-Line Axitinib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From a Randomized Phase II Study.

BACKGROUND: An unmet need exists for treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who progress on or are intolerant to sorafenib. A global randomized phase II trial (ClinicalTrial.gov No. NCT01210495) of axitinib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1-3 inhibitor, in combination with best supportive care (BSC) did not prolong overall survival (OS) over placebo/BSC, but showed improved progression-free survival in some patients. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify potential predictive/prognostic factors. METHODS: The data from this phase II study were analyzed for the efficacy and safety of axitinib/BSC in patients from Asia versus non-Asia versus Asian subgroups (Japan, Korea, or mainland China/Hong Kong/Taiwan) and predictive/prognostic values of baseline microRNAs and serum soluble proteins, using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of 202 patients, 78 were from non-Asia and 124 from Asia (37 Japanese, 36 Korean, and 51 Chinese). No significant differences in OS were found between axitinib/BSC and placebo/BSC in non-Asians, Asians, or Asian subgroups. However, in an exploratory analysis, axitinib/BSC showed favorable OS in Asians, especially Japanese, when patients intolerant to prior antiangiogenic therapy were excluded from the data set. Axitinib/BSC was well tolerated by non-Asians and Asians alike. The presence of 4 circulating microRNAs, including miR-5684 and miR-1224-5p, or a level lower than or equal to the median protein level of stromal cell-derived factor 1 at baseline was significantly associated with longer OS in axitinib/BSC-treated Asians or non-Asians. CONCLUSIONS: Axitinib/BSC did not prolong survival over placebo/BSC in non-Asians, Asians, or Asian subgroups, but favorable OS with axitinib/BSC was observed in a subset of Japanese patients. A patient population that excludes sorafenib-intolerant patients might potentially be more suitable for clinical trials of new agents in advanced HCC. Since these results are very preliminary, further investigation is warranted. The potential predictive/prognostic value of several baseline microRNAs and soluble proteins identified in this study would require validation in prospective studies on a large cohort of patients.

Sunitinib in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Clinical Outcome According to International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Risk Group.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib malate, a targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is standard of care for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and serves as the active comparator in several ongoing mRCC clinical trials. In this analysis we report benchmarks for clinical outcomes on the basis of International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups for patients treated with sunitinib for mRCC in a first-line setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on data from sunitinib-treated patients (n = 375) in the pivotal phase III trial of sunitinib versus interferon-α as first-line treatment for mRCC. Objective response rates (ORRs) were determined from independently reviewed radiologic assessments. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) according to patient risk group. RESULTS: Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 14.1 (13.4-17.1), 10.7 (10.5-12.5), 2.4 (1.1-4.7), and 10.6 (8.1-10.9) months in sunitinib-treated patients in the IMDC favorable (n = 134), intermediate (n = 205), poor (n = 34), and intermediate + poor (n = 239) risk groups, respectively. Median OS (95% CI) was 23.0 (19.8-27.8), 5.1 (4.3-9.9), and 20.3 (16.8-23.0) months in sunitinib-treated patients in IMDC intermediate, poor, and intermediate + poor risk groups, respectively, and was not reached in the favorable risk group (>50% of patients were alive at data cutoff). ORRs (95% CI) was 53.0% (44.2%-61.7%), 33.7% (27.2%-40.6%), 11.8% (3.3%-27.5%), and 30.5% (24.8%-36.8%) in sunitinib-treated patients in IMDC favorable, intermediate, poor, and intermediate + poor risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Results of this retrospective analysis show differences in patient outcomes for PFS, OS, and ORR on the basis of IMDC prognostic risk group assignment for patients with mRCC.

Validation of the 16-Gene Recurrence Score in Patients with Locoregional, High-Risk Renal Cell Carcinoma from a Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Sunitinib.

Purpose: Adjuvant sunitinib prolonged disease-free survival (DFS; HR, 0.76) in patients with locoregional high-risk renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the S-TRAC trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00375674). The 16-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay was previously developed and validated to estimate risk for disease recurrence in patients with RCC after nephrectomy. This analysis further validated the prognostic value of RS assay in patients from S-TRAC and explored the association of RS results with prediction of sunitinib benefit.Patients and Methods: The analysis was prospectively designed with prespecified genes, algorithm, endpoints, and analytical methods. Primary RCC was available from 212 patients with informed consent; primary analysis focused on patients with T3 RCC. Gene expression was quantitated by RT-PCR. Time to recurrence (TTR), DFS, and renal cancer-specific survival (RCSS) were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression.Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between patients with and those without RS results, and between the sunitinib and placebo arms among patients with RS results. RS results predicted TTR, DFS, and RCSS in both arms, with the strongest results observed in the placebo arm. When high versus low RS groups were compared, HR for recurrence was 9.18 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.15-39.24; P < 0.001) in the placebo arm; interaction of RS results with treatment was not significant.Conclusions: The strong prognostic performance of the 16-gene RS assay was confirmed in S-TRAC, and the RS assay is now supported by level IB evidence. RS results may help identify patients at high risk for recurrence who may derive higher absolute benefit from adjuvant therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 24(18); 4407-15. ©2018 AACR.

A case for the use of receiver operating characteristic analysis of potential clinical efficacy biomarkers in advanced renal cell carcinoma.

AIM: Assess patient-level utility of suggested pretreatment biomarkers of sunitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS & METHODS: Kaplan-Meier analysis of data from a randomized, Phase II study (n = 292) suggested baseline predictive value for circulating soluble Ang-2 and MMP-2 and HIF-1α percentage of tumor expression. Using this dataset, the sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated, using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: Based on a ROC (sensitivity vs 1 - specificity) threshold AUC value of >0.8, neither Ang-2 (0.67) nor MMP-2 (0.65), nor HIF-1α percentage of tumor expression (0.65), performed appropriately from a patient-selection standpoint. CONCLUSION: To properly assess potential biomarkers, sensitivity and specificity characteristics should be obtained by ROC analysis.

Phase I Study of Axitinib in Combination with Cisplatin and Capecitabine in Patients with Previously Untreated Advanced Gastric Cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase I trial evaluated the question of whether the standard starting dose of axitinib could be administered in combination with therapeutic doses of cisplatin/capecitabine in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer, and assessed overall safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of this combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in dose level (DL) 1 received axitinib 5 mg twice a day (days 1 to 21) with cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1) and capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) twice a day (days 1 to 14) in 21-day cycles. Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was the highest dose at which ≤ 30% of the first 12 patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) during cycle 1. Ten additional patients were enrolled and treated at the MTD in order to obtain additional safety and pharmacokinetic data. RESULTS: Three DLTs occurred during cycle 1 in three (25%) of the first 12 patients: ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, acute renal failure, and > 5 consecutive days of missed axitinib due to thrombocytopenia. DL1 was established as the MTD, since higher DL cohorts were not planned. Common grade 3/4 non-hematologic adverse events in 22 patients treated at DL1 included hypertension (36.4%) and decreased appetite and stomatitis (18.2% each). Cisplatin/capecitabine slightly increased axitinib exposure; axitinib decreased capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil exposure. Eight patients (36.4%) each had partial response or stable disease. Median response duration was 9.1 months; median progression-free survival was 3.8 months. CONCLUSION: In patients with advanced gastric cancer, standard doses of axitinib plus therapeutic doses of cisplatin and capecitabine could be administered in combination. Adverse events were manageable.

Investigation of novel circulating proteins, germ line single-nucleotide polymorphisms, and molecular tumor markers as potential efficacy biomarkers of first-line sunitinib therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Sunitinib is a first-line advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) standard of care. In a randomized phase II trial comparing sunitinib treatment schedules, separate exploratory biomarker analyses investigated the correlations of efficacy with selected serum, germ line single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), or tumor markers. METHODS: Advanced RCC patients received first-line sunitinib 50 mg/day on the approved 4-week-on-2-week-off schedule (n = 146) or 37.5 mg/day continuous dosing (n = 146). The following correlation analyses were performed: (1) response evaluation criteria in solid tumors-defined tumor response with serum soluble protein levels via two distinct multiplex (n < 1,000) platforms; (2) response and time-to-event outcomes with germ line SNPs in vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A and VEGF receptor (VEGFR)3 genes; and (3) response and time-to-event outcomes with tumor immunohistochemistry status for hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha (HIF-1α) and carbonic anhydrase-IX or tumor Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene inactivation status. RESULTS: Lower baseline angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) and higher baseline matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) levels were identified by both platforms as statistically significantly associated with tumor response. There were no significant correlations between VEGF-A or VEGFR3 SNPs and outcomes. Progression-free survival was longer for HIF-1α percent of tumor expression groups 0-2 (HIF-1α low) versus 3-4 (HIF-1α high; p = 0.034). There were no significant correlations between outcomes and each VHL inactivation mechanism [mutation (86% of VHL-inactive patients), methylation (14%), and large deletion (7%)] or mechanisms combined. CONCLUSIONS: Serum Ang-2 and MMP-2 and tumor HIF-1α were identified as relevant baseline biomarkers of sunitinib activity in advanced RCC, warranting further research into their prognostic versus predictive value.

Randomized phase II trial of sunitinib on an intermittent versus continuous dosing schedule as first-line therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Sunitinib has shown antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile as metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treatment, when given by the standard intermittent schedule as well as a continuous daily dosing (CDD) schedule. A trial was conducted to compare the schedules. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naive, clear cell advanced RCC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive sunitinib 50 mg/d for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks off treatment (schedule 4/2; n = 146) or 37.5 mg/d on the CDD schedule (n = 146) for up to 2 years. The primary end point was time to tumor progression. RESULTS: Median time to tumor progression was 9.9 months for schedule 4/2 and 7.1 months for the CDD schedule (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.04; P = .090). No significant difference was observed in overall survival (23.1 v 23.5 months; P = .615), commonly reported adverse events, or patient-reported kidney cancer symptoms. Schedule 4/2 was statistically superior to CDD in time to deterioration, a composite end point of death, progression, and disease-related symptoms (P = .034). CONCLUSION; There was no benefit in efficacy or safety for continuous dosing of sunitinib compared with the approved 50 mg/d dose on schedule 4/2. Given the numerically longer time to tumor progression with the approved 50 mg/d dose on schedule 4/2, adherence to this dose and schedule remains the treatment goal for patients with advanced RCC.

Ongoing phase I and II studies of novel anthracyclines.

Many anthracyclines are currently in clinical development with the common aim of improving selectivity. This could be achieved by improving tumor drug delivery through the identification and development of molecules with new structure, prodrugs with low molecular weight for selective release and activation, prodrugs with high molecular weight conjugated to antibody with active targeting or macromolecules with enhanced permeability and retention. There are still interfering factors to be defined, in particular chemical, with degradation steps in tumor tissues, biological, related to tumor proteases, pharmacological, with inter-individual tumor differences in the extent of accumulation. Another way to improve selectivity is to activate the drug at the tumor site, a good example of which is provided by Nemorubicin (2\"-(S)-methoxymorpholinodoxorubicin hydrochloride) in hepatocellular carcinoma. The favorable characteristics of Nemorubicin in terms of broad spectrum of significant antitumor activity in liver malignancies models, lower cardiotoxicity than Doxorubicin, make Nemorubicin a promising third-generation anthracycline, suitable for intrahepatic administration.