| Literature DB >> 28792952 |
John J Bissler1, J Chris Kingswood2, Elzbieta Radzikowska3, Bernard A Zonnenberg4, Elena Belousova5, Michael D Frost6, Matthias Sauter7, Susanne Brakemeier8, Petrus J de Vries9, Noah Berkowitz10, Maurizio Voi10, Severine Peyrard11, Klemens Budde8.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We examined the long-term effects of everolimus in patients with renal angiomyolipoma associated with tuberous sclerosis complex or sporadic lymphangioleiomyomatosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28792952 PMCID: PMC5549893 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180939
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1CONSORT flow diagram of patient disposition in the double-blind followed by open-label periods.
aPatients with angiomyolipoma progression were unblinded at the end of the double-blind phase, and patients who were on placebo were allowed to cross over to open-label everolimus.
Patient baseline characteristics.
| Characteristic | Everolimus |
|---|---|
| Age, median (range), years | 32.2 (18.1–61.6) |
| Age category, years, n (%) | |
| <30 | 49 (43.8) |
| ≥30 | 63 (56.3) |
| Sex, n (%) | |
| Male | 39 (34.8) |
| Female | 73 (65.2) |
| Race, n (%) | |
| White | 99 (88.4) |
| Asian | 11 (9.8) |
| Other | 2 (1.8) |
| Diagnosis of TSC, | 107 (95.5) |
| Diagnosis of sporadic LAM, n (%) | 5 (4.5) |
| Diagnosis of LAM, n (%) | 24 (21.4) |
| Presence of ≥1 SEGA lesion, n (%) | 50 (44.6) |
| Presence of ≥1 skin lesion, n (%) | 107 (95.5) |
| Facial angiofibromas or forehead plaque | 105 (93.8) |
| Ungual or periungual fibroma | 68 (60.7) |
| Hypomelanotic macules (three or more) | 69 (61.6) |
| Shagreen patch | 54 (48.2) |
| 'Confetti' skin lesions | 30 (26.8) |
| Prior renal angiomyolipoma—related surgery, n (%) | 42 (37.5) |
| Prior nephrectomy, n (%) | 21 (18.8) |
| Bilateral renal angiomyolipoma lesions, n (%) | 88 (78.6) |
| Longest diameter of largest renal angiomyolipoma lesion, n (%) | |
| ≥8 cm | 33 (29.5) |
| ≥4 cm and <8 cm | 64 (57.1) |
| ≥3 cm and <4 cm | 7 (6.3) |
| <3 cm | 6 (5.4) |
| Unknown | 0 |
| Not applicable | 2 (1.8) |
| Target renal angiomyolipoma lesions ≥1 cm, n (%) | |
| 0 | 2 (1.8) |
| 1–5 | 43 (38.4) |
| 6–10 | 67 (59.8) |
| Sum of volumes of target renal angiomyolipoma lesions | |
| Number of patients with ≥1 target renal angiomyolipoma | 110 |
| Median (range), cm3 | 92.1 (2.8–1611.5) |
Abbreviations: LAM = lymphangioleiomyomatosis; SEGA = subependymal giant cell astrocytoma; TSC = tuberous sclerosis complex.
aDesignates patients who were of mixed race.
bAll patients with diagnosed TSC had ≥2 major features of TSC. In patients with both LAM and renal angiomyolipoma, another feature must have been identified to assign TSC diagnosis.
Fig 2Best percentage reduction in the sum volume of target renal angiomyolipomas each individual patient reported at any time point in the study in 101 evaluable patients.a
11 patients were considered “non-evaluable” due to missing overall angiomyolipoma response status at each radiological assessment. Among the 12 patients with a best overall response with the status “not evaluable”, only one patient reported at least one radiological assessment with a non-missing overall angiomyolipoma response status.
Fig 3Renal angiomyolipoma response rate with everolimus over time.
Fig 4Time to renal angiomyolipoma progression.
Fig 5Reduction in SEGA volume with everolimus over time in patients with renal angiomyolipomas.
Pulmonary function tests in patients with LAM over time.
| Everolimus | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Week 24 | Week 96 | Week 192 | |
| FEV1 | |||
| Baseline, median (min, max), L | 2.8 (1.2, 3.6) | 2.55 (1.2, 3.5) | 2.8 (1.2, 3.6) |
| Assessment, median (min, max), L | 2.6 (1.3, 3.6) | 2.55 (1.0, 3.5) | 2.45 (0.9, 3.4) |
| Median percentage change from baseline | –3.45 | –5.88 | –9 |
| FVC | |||
| Baseline, median (min, max), L | 3.6 (1.8, 5.2) | 3.6 (1.8, 5.2) | 3.65 (2.1, 5.2) |
| Assessment, median (min, max), L | 3.6 (2.0, 5.7) | 3.6 (1.7, 5.4) | 3.6 (2.1, 5.7) |
| Median percentage change from baseline | 0 | –1.25 | –4.29 |
| DLCO | |||
| Baseline, median (min, max), mmol/min/Kpa | 6.01 (2.7, 9.6) | 5.76 (2.7, 9.6) | 6.01 (2.7, 9.6) |
| Assessment, median (min, max), mmol/min/KPa | 5.74 (1.3, 8.2) | 5.23 (2.2, 9.4) | 5.95 (2.4, 7.0) |
| Median percentage change from baseline | –2.69 | –10.19 | –10.62 |
Abbreviations: DLCO = diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide; FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in 1 second; FVC = forced vital capacity.
Adverse events by preferred term regardless of relationship to study drug and by year of emergence (>15% of patients).
| Adverse events, n (%) | ≤12 months | 13–24 months | 25–36 months | 37–48 months | 49–60 months |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stomatitis | 46 (41.1) | 9 (8.9) | 5 (5.0) | 5 (5.5) | 2 (3.8) |
| Nasopharyngitis | 36 (32.1) | 21 (20.8) | 20 (20.0) | 20 (22.0) | 6 (11.5) |
| Acne | 28 (25.0) | 8 (7.9) | 6 (6.0) | 2 (2.2) | 0 |
| Headache | 26 (23.2) | 11 (10.9) | 6 (6.0) | 4 (4.4) | 1 (1.9) |
| Hypercholesterolemia | 25 (22.3) | 13 (12.9) | 11 (11.0) | 7 (7.7) | 1 (1.9) |
| Aphthous stomatitis | 21 (18.8) | 15 (14.9) | 9 (9.0) | 5 (5.5) | 2 (3.8) |
| Fatigue | 19 (17.0) | 2 (2.0) | 4 (4.0) | 4 (4.4) | 2 (3.8) |
| Cough | 18 (16.1) | 4 (4.0) | 4 (4.0) | 3 (3.3) | 0 |
| Diarrhoea | 17 (15.2) | 7 (6.9) | 7 (7.0) | 4 (4.4) | 1 (1.9) |
| Mouth ulceration | 17 (15.2) | 6 (5.9) | 5 (5.0) | 2 (2.2) | 0 |
| Nausea | 17 (15.2) | 5 (5.0) | 2 (2.0) | 3 (3.3) | 0 |
Fig 6Median GFR (A) and creatinine (B) over time.
Medians are connected by lines, means are displayed as dots. Boxes are drawn from P25 to P75. Whiskers extend from P10 to P90. # indicates values that lie outside [P10, P90]. *Baseline assessment is the last performed before start of everolimus. Post-baseline laboratory assessments performed at unplanned schedule or more than 28 days after discontinuation of everolimus are not presented. Only results from central laboratory are included. Abbreviations: BL = baseline; GFR = glomerular filtration rate; P = percentile.