Olivia Le Saux1,2, Gilles Freyer3, Sylvie Négrier4. 1. Centre Léon Bérard, Université de Lyon, 28, rue Laennec, 69373, Lyon Cedex 08, France. olivia.lesaux@gmail.com. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, HCL Cancer Institute, Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France. olivia.lesaux@gmail.com. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, HCL Cancer Institute, Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France. 4. Centre Léon Bérard, Université de Lyon, 28, rue Laennec, 69373, Lyon Cedex 08, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: No head-to-head clinical trials are available to help physicians in the decision-making process of first-line therapy in poor-prognosis metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The objectives of our study were to identify experts' prescribing practices and to review available clinical data in first-line therapies for poor-prognosis metastatic RCC (mRCC). METHODS: Thirteen RCC experts were asked to fill in a self-administered questionnaire evaluating prescribing practices. A systematic review was performed in July 2015 in MEDLINE for clinical trials evaluating first-line strategy in poor-prognosis mRCC. RESULTS: Ten out of 13 experts completed the questionnaire (76.9%). Sunitinib was the most frequently prescribed first-line therapy (8/10; 80%). The main reason for prescribing sunitinib most frequently was the evidence of effectiveness for the majority (5/8 experts). A total of 21 articles were found suitable. Only one phase III randomized controlled trial in which all patients had a poor prognosis was retrieved. Temsirolimus increases progression-free survival and overall survival compared to IFN-alpha. Increased PFS with sunitinib in poor-prognosis patients was shown in a subgroup analysis of the pivotal trial. An expanded-access trial confirmed this result. DISCUSSION: Experts tend to prefer sunitinib as first-line therapy even in poor-prognosis mRCC. In light of the systematic review, no targeted therapy appears to be more effective than another. The upcoming challenge is to discover more effective new drugs since the overall survival of poor-prognosis mRCC still remains extremely limited.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: No head-to-head clinical trials are available to help physicians in the decision-making process of first-line therapy in poor-prognosis metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The objectives of our study were to identify experts' prescribing practices and to review available clinical data in first-line therapies for poor-prognosis metastatic RCC (mRCC). METHODS: Thirteen RCC experts were asked to fill in a self-administered questionnaire evaluating prescribing practices. A systematic review was performed in July 2015 in MEDLINE for clinical trials evaluating first-line strategy in poor-prognosis mRCC. RESULTS: Ten out of 13 experts completed the questionnaire (76.9%). Sunitinib was the most frequently prescribed first-line therapy (8/10; 80%). The main reason for prescribing sunitinib most frequently was the evidence of effectiveness for the majority (5/8 experts). A total of 21 articles were found suitable. Only one phase III randomized controlled trial in which all patients had a poor prognosis was retrieved. Temsirolimus increases progression-free survival and overall survival compared to IFN-alpha. Increased PFS with sunitinib in poor-prognosis patients was shown in a subgroup analysis of the pivotal trial. An expanded-access trial confirmed this result. DISCUSSION: Experts tend to prefer sunitinib as first-line therapy even in poor-prognosis mRCC. In light of the systematic review, no targeted therapy appears to be more effective than another. The upcoming challenge is to discover more effective new drugs since the overall survival of poor-prognosis mRCC still remains extremely limited.
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Thomas E Hutson; Piotr Tomczak; M Dror Michaelson; Ronald M Bukowski; Olivier Rixe; Stéphane Oudard; Sylvie Negrier; Cezary Szczylik; Sindy T Kim; Isan Chen; Paul W Bycott; Charles M Baum; Robert A Figlin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-01-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sumanta K Pal; Jeremy O Jones; Courtney Carmichael; Junmi Saikia; Joanne Hsu; Xueli Liu; Robert A Figlin; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Clayton Lau Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2012-05-17 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Ali Tafreshi; Eddy Thientosapol; Mun Sem Liew; Yuan Guo; Melissa Quaggiotto; Michael Boyer; Ian D Davis Journal: Asia Pac J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 2.601
Authors: Thomas E Hutson; Bernard Escudier; Emilio Esteban; Georg A Bjarnason; Ho Yeong Lim; Kenneth B Pittman; Peggy Senico; Andreas Niethammer; Dongrui Ray Lu; Subramanian Hariharan; Robert J Motzer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-12-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Daniel Y C Heng; Wanling Xie; Meredith M Regan; Lauren C Harshman; Georg A Bjarnason; Ulka N Vaishampayan; Mary Mackenzie; Lori Wood; Frede Donskov; Min-Han Tan; Sun-Young Rha; Neeraj Agarwal; Christian Kollmannsberger; Brian I Rini; Toni K Choueiri Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Daniel Y C Heng; Wanling Xie; Meredith M Regan; Mark A Warren; Ali Reza Golshayan; Chakshu Sahi; Bernhard J Eigl; J Dean Ruether; Tina Cheng; Scott North; Peter Venner; Jennifer J Knox; Kim N Chi; Christian Kollmannsberger; David F McDermott; William K Oh; Michael B Atkins; Ronald M Bukowski; Brian I Rini; Toni K Choueiri Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-10-13 Impact factor: 44.544