OBJECTIVES: Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive malignancy with a high propensity for both early and metachronous regional and distant metastasis. While surgical resection is the mainstay of therapy for patients with localized disease, the prognosis for patients with distant metastasis is poor with a 5-year survival rate of less than 10%. Response rates to first-line immunotherapy or immunochemotherapy range from 10-35%; responses achieved are predominantly partial remissions of short duration. Until today, there is no standard therapeutic procedure for the growing number of patients who relapse following first-line therapy and desire further active treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article reviews classic and recent publications about second- and third-line approaches, their potential efficacy and toxicity. RESULTS: Several novel approaches have raised well-founded hope. Especially the application of monoclonal antibodies targeting VEGF signalling as well as different receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors have the potential to change the face of second-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC. Both groups of agents are focused in current phase III trials, either as mono- and/or combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Until today, second-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC progressing under therapy with biological response modifiers remains an unresolved issue. The results of ongoing clinical trials evaluating novel targeted approaches can be expected with suspense.
OBJECTIVES:Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive malignancy with a high propensity for both early and metachronous regional and distant metastasis. While surgical resection is the mainstay of therapy for patients with localized disease, the prognosis for patients with distant metastasis is poor with a 5-year survival rate of less than 10%. Response rates to first-line immunotherapy or immunochemotherapy range from 10-35%; responses achieved are predominantly partial remissions of short duration. Until today, there is no standard therapeutic procedure for the growing number of patients who relapse following first-line therapy and desire further active treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article reviews classic and recent publications about second- and third-line approaches, their potential efficacy and toxicity. RESULTS: Several novel approaches have raised well-founded hope. Especially the application of monoclonal antibodies targeting VEGF signalling as well as different receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors have the potential to change the face of second-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC. Both groups of agents are focused in current phase III trials, either as mono- and/or combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Until today, second-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC progressing under therapy with biological response modifiers remains an unresolved issue. The results of ongoing clinical trials evaluating novel targeted approaches can be expected with suspense.
Authors: P H Maxwell; M S Wiesener; G W Chang; S C Clifford; E C Vaux; M E Cockman; C C Wykoff; C W Pugh; E R Maher; P J Ratcliffe Journal: Nature Date: 1999-05-20 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: B Escudier; C Chevreau; C Lasset; J Y Douillard; A Ravaud; M Fabbro; A Caty; J F Rossi; P Viens; J P Bergerat; J Savary; S Négrier Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: G P Kalemkerian; X Ou; M R Adil; R Rosati; M M Khoulani; S K Madan; G R Pettit Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 1999 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Apurva A Desai; Nicholas J Vogelzang; Brian I Rini; Rafat Ansari; Stuart Krauss; Walter M Stadler Journal: Cancer Date: 2002-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S D Fosså; G Martinelli; U Otto; G Schneider; H Wander; F Oberling; H W Bauer; U Achtnicht; E E Holdener Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 1992-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: A Ravaud; N Trufflandier; J M Ferrière; M Debled; J Palussière; L Cany; R Gaston; S Mathoulin-Pélissier; B N Bui Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2003-12-15 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Mahmoud Abbas; Sandra Steffens; Maria Bellut; Jan U Becker; Anika Großhennig; Hendrik Eggers; Gerd Wegener; Markus A Kuczyk; Hans H Kreipe; Viktor Grünwald; Andres J Schrader; Philipp Ivanyi Journal: Med Oncol Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 3.064
Authors: Raimundo Fernandes de Araújo Júnior; Ana Luiza C S Leitão Oliveira; Raniere Fagundes de Melo Silveira; Hugo Alexandre de Oliveira Rocha; Pedro de França Cavalcanti; Aurigena Antunes de Araújo Journal: Exp Biol Med (Maywood) Date: 2014-08-14
Authors: S Waalkes; F C Roos; H Eggers; S Schumacher; M Janssen; G Wegener; J W Thüroff; R Hofmann; M Schrader; M A Kuczyk; A J Schrader Journal: Urologe A Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Sandra Steffens; Frederik C Roos; Martin Janssen; Frank Becker; Julie Steinestel; Mahmoud Abbas; Konrad Steinestel; Gerd Wegener; Stefan Siemer; Joachim W Thüroff; Rainer Hofmann; Michael Stöckle; Mark Schrader; Arndt Hartmann; Kerstin Junker; Markus A Kuczyk; Andres J Schrader Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2014-09-02 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Andres Jan Schrader; Julia Rustemeier; Jan Christoph Rustemeier; Nina Timmesfeld; Zoltan Varga; Axel Hegele; Peter Jochen Olbert; Rainer Hofmann Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2009-06-20 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: A J Schrader; S Rauer-Bruening; P J Olbert; A Hegele; J Rustemeier; N Timmesfeld; Z Varga; R Hofmann Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2008-11-21 Impact factor: 4.553