SWITCH: A Randomised, Sequential, Open-label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Sorafenib-sunitinib Versus Sunitinib-sorafenib in the Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how to sequence targeted therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is important for maximisation of clinical benefit. OBJECTIVES: To prospectively evaluate sequential use of the multikinase inhibitors sorafenib followed by sunitinib (So-Su) versus sunitinib followed by sorafenib (Su-So) in patients with mRCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 SWITCH study assessed So-Su versus Su-So in patients with mRCC without prior systemic therapy, and stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk score (favourable or intermediate). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomised to sorafenib 400mg twice daily followed, on progression or intolerable toxicity, by sunitinib 50mg once daily (4 wk on, 2 wk off) (So-Su), or vice versa (Su-So). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with So-Su versus Su-So, assessed from randomisation to progression or death during second-line therapy. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 365 patients were randomised (So-Su, n=182; Su-So, n=183). There was no significant difference in total PFS between So-Su and Su-So (median 12.5 vs 14.9 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 1.01; 90% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-1.27; p=0.5 for superiority). OS was similar for So-Su and Su-So (median 31.5 and 30.2 mo; HR 1.00, 90% CI 0.77-1.30; p=0.5 for superiority). More So-Su patients than Su-So patients reached protocol-defined second-line therapy (57% vs 42%). Overall, adverse event rates were generally similar between the treatment arms. The most frequent any-grade treatment-emergent first-line adverse events were diarrhoea (54%) and hand-foot skin reaction (39%) for sorafenib; and diarrhoea (40%) and fatigue (40%) for sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Total PFS was not superior with So-Su versus Su-So. These results demonstrate that sorafenib followed by sunitinib and vice versa provide similar clinical benefit in mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated if total progression-free survival (PFS) is improved in patients with advanced/metastatic kidney cancer who are treated with sorafenib and then with sunitinib (So-Su), compared with sunitinib and then sorafenib (Su-So). We found that total PFS was not improved with So-Su compared with Su-So, but both treatment options were similarly effective in patients with advanced/metastatic kidney cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00732914, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Incidence of voriconazole hepatotoxicity during intravenous and oral treatment for invasive fungal infections.

OBJECTIVES: Absorption of oral voriconazole is good and in contrast to the intravenous (iv) formulation it can be given in patients with renal insufficiency. Furthermore, the acquisition costs are significantly lower. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of hepatotoxicity in patients treated with the oral formulation of voriconazole with that in patients treated with the iv formulation. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study. A total of 35 patients with haematological disease and an invasive fungal infection were treated with oral voriconazole during the entire regimen. We compared the incidence of hepatotoxicity with that in 11 patients treated intravenously during the first week. RESULTS: The incidence of increased liver enzymes was comparable between both groups. Voriconazole was discontinued in two patients in the oral group and one patient in the iv group because of hepatotoxicity. The incidence of liver enzyme elevations in the entire study cohort of 46 patients was higher than that previously reported in a comparable study population (P < 0.001). However, clinically significant hepatotoxicity was infrequently observed (3/46 or 6.5%). CONCLUSIONS: In 35 patients with invasive fungal infections we instituted oral voriconazole therapy from day 1 and found an incidence of hepatotoxicity comparable to 11 controls treated intravenously.

Resolution of EBV(+) CNS lymphoma with appearance of CSF EBV-specific T cells.

Current knowledge of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-specific T-cell responses in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients with EBV-related lymphoproliferative disease (EBV-LPD) in the central nervous system (CNS) is very limited. Here, we present two recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplants with EBV-LPD in the CNS. EBV-specific CD8(+) T lymphocytes were detected in CSF and peripheral blood using major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I multimers loaded with EBV-derived peptides. The appearance of EBV-specific CD8(+) T cells in CSF and blood correlated with neurological improvement and disappearance of EBV-LPD. These observations suggest a role for EBV-specific CD8(+) T cells in the control of EBV-LPD in the CNS.