TY - JOUR
T1 - Everolimus versus sunitinib for patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ASPEN)
T2 - A multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial
AU - Armstrong, Andrew J.
AU - Halabi, Susan
AU - Eisen, Tim
AU - Broderick, Samuel
AU - Stadler, Walter M.
AU - Jones, Robert J.
AU - Garcia, Jorge A.
AU - Vaishampayan, Ulka N.
AU - Picus, Joel
AU - Hawkins, Robert E.
AU - Hainsworth, John D.
AU - Kollmannsberger, Christian K.
AU - Logan, Theodore F.
AU - Puzanov, Igor
AU - Pickering, Lisa M.
AU - Ryan, Christopher W.
AU - Protheroe, Andrew
AU - Lusk, Christine M.
AU - Oberg, Sadie
AU - George, Daniel J.
N1 - Funding Information:
AJA and DJG reports grants from Novartis and Pfizer during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Dendreon, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Medivation/Astellas, and Janssen, outside the submitted work. DJG also reports grants from Innocrin and Exelixis and personal fees from BMS and Janssen. TE is an employee of AstraZeneca and reports grants from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Novartis, Roche, BMS, and AVEO, grants from Bayer, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, GSK, personal fees and grant to institution from Astellas, outside the submitted work. JAG reports grants and personal fees from Pfizer and Novartis, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Bayer and Medivation/Astellas, and personal fees from Sanofi-Aventis, outside the submitted work. TFL reports grants from Novartis and Pfizer, during the conduct of the study; grants from Abbott, Abraxis, Acceleron, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biovex, and Cerulean, Eisai, Eli Lilly grants and personal fees from Argos and Aveo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Immatics, Merck, Roche, Synta, Threshold, Tracon, EMD Serono, Millennium, and Schering-Plough, personal fees from Genentech, and grants and personal fees from Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, and Wyeth, outside the submitted work. CKK reports personal fees from Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, and Sanofi-Aventis, outside the submitted work. UNV reports grants and personal fees from Novartis and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. CWR reports personal fees from Pfizer and Genentech, research grant to institution from Onyx, outside the submitted work. RJJ reports grants from Pfizer and Novartis, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Pfizer, and grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Novartis and GSK, outside the submitted work. WMS reports grants and personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. LMP reports personal fees from Pfizer and Novartis. SH, SB, JP, REH, JDH, IP, AP, CML, and SO declare no competing interests.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd.
PY - 2016/3/1
Y1 - 2016/3/1
N2 - Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Methods: We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01108445. Findings: Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months [80% CI 5·8-11·4] vs 5·6 months [5·5-6·0]; hazard ratio 1·41 [80% CI 1·03-1·92]; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (12 [24%] of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one [2%] of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six [12%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (five [10%] vs one [2%]), pneumonitis (none vs five [9%]), stomatitis (none vs five [9%]), and hand-foot syndrome (four [8%] vs none). Interpretation: In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors. Funding: Novartis and Pfizer.
AB - Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Methods: We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01108445. Findings: Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months [80% CI 5·8-11·4] vs 5·6 months [5·5-6·0]; hazard ratio 1·41 [80% CI 1·03-1·92]; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (12 [24%] of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one [2%] of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six [12%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (five [10%] vs one [2%]), pneumonitis (none vs five [9%]), stomatitis (none vs five [9%]), and hand-foot syndrome (four [8%] vs none). Interpretation: In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors. Funding: Novartis and Pfizer.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960494358&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84960494358&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00515-X
DO - 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00515-X
M3 - Article
C2 - 26794930
AN - SCOPUS:84960494358
SN - 1470-2045
VL - 17
SP - 378
EP - 388
JO - The Lancet Oncology
JF - The Lancet Oncology
IS - 3
ER -