Literature DB >> 22766517

An indirect comparison of the toxicity of sunitinib and pazopanib in metastatic clear cell renal cancer.

Thomas Powles1, Naveed Sarwar, Rob Jones, Peter Wilson, Ekaterini Boleti, Andrew Protheroe, Simon J Crabb, Jonathan Shamash, Andrew Stockdale, Sukaina Rashid, Paul Nathan, Simon Chowdury.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Both sunitinib and pazopanib are widely used as first line therapy in metastatic renal cancer (mRCC). The efficacy of these agents appears similar but they may have distinct toxicity profiles. In this study we compare the severity of symptomatic and asymptomatic toxicity associated with sunitinib and pazopanib.
METHODS: Two sequential prospective single arm phase II studies investigated either 12 weeks of sunitinib (n=43) or pazopanib (n=34) prior to nephrectomy in untreated mRCC. Toxicity was defined as either symptomatic (hand and foot syndrome, mucositis, nausea, fatigue, diarrhoea, oedema, headache, pain, anorexia and change in taste) or asymptomatic (liver toxicity or haematological toxicity). Pazopanib (800 mg once daily (OD)) and sunitinib (50 mg 4/2) were given. Regular Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) toxicity assessment was performed during the first 12 weeks of therapy.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the overall number of toxic events (grade 1-4) for sunitinib and pazopanib (mean number of toxic events/patients: 1.97 versus 1.96: p>0.05). Increased grade 2-4 symptomatic toxicity events occurred with sunitinib (hazard ratio (HR) 1.67 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-2.56] p<0.03). Sunitinib was associated with an increased grade 2-4 mucositis (16% versus 0% p=0.02) and fatigue (42% versus 15% p=0.01). Pazopanib was associated with more frequent grade 1 diarrhoea (39% versus 12%: p=0.03). Dose reductions for symptomatic toxicity occurred more frequently with sunitinib (26% versus 6% p<0.05). There was no difference in the occurrence of asymptomatic toxicity.
CONCLUSION: This indirect analysis suggests sunitinib and pazopanib have distinct toxicity profiles which may help guide patient's choice. Further comparative data from randomised trials are awaited.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22766517     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.05.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  2 in total

1.  Neoadjuvant targeted molecular therapies in patients undergoing nephrectomy and inferior vena cava thrombectomy: is it useful?

Authors:  Pierre Bigot; Tarek Fardoun; Jean Christophe Bernhard; Evanguelos Xylinas; Julien Berger; Morgan Rouprêt; Jean-Baptiste Beauval; Samuel Lagabrielle; Souhil Lebdai; Myriam Ammi; Hervé Baumert; Bernard Escudier; Nicolas Grenier; Jean-François Hétet; Jean-Alexandre Long; Philippe Paparel; Nathalie Rioux-Leclercq; Michel Soulié; Abdel-Rahmène Azzouzi; Karim Bensalah; Jean-Jacques Patard
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-04-27       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Sunitinib versus Pazopanib Dilemma in Renal Cell Carcinoma: New Insights into the In Vitro Metabolic Impact, Efficacy, and Safety.

Authors:  Filipa Amaro; Carolina Pisoeiro; Maria João Valente; Maria de Lourdes Bastos; Paula Guedes de Pinho; Márcia Carvalho; Joana Pinto
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 6.208

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.