Robert J Motzer1, Paul Russo2, Naomi Haas3, Christian Doehn4, Frede Donskov5, Marine Gross-Goupil6, Sergei Varlamov7, Evgeny Kopyltsov8, Jae Lyun Lee9, Ho Yeong Lim10, Bohuslav Melichar11, Milada Zemanova12, Brian Rini13, Toni K Choueiri14, Lori Wood15, M Neil Reaume16, Arnulf Stenzl17, Simon Chowdhury18, Ray McDermott19, Agnieszka Michael20, Miguel Izquierdo21, Paola Aimone22, Hong Zhang21, Cora N Sternberg23. 1. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: motzerr@mskcc.org. 2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 4. University of Lubeck Medical School and Urologikum Lubeck, Lubeck, Germany. 5. Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 6. Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France. 7. Altai Regional Cancer Center, Barnaul, Russia. 8. State Institution of Healthcare Regional Clinical Oncology Dispensary, Omsk, Russia. 9. University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 10. Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, South Korea. 11. Palacky University Medical School and Teaching Hospital, Olomouc, Czech Republic. 12. Charles University and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. 13. Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA. 14. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 15. Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre and Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. 16. The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 17. University Hospital Tubingen, Tubingen, Germany. 18. Guy's and St Thomas' National Health Service Foundation, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, UK. 19. Tallaght University Hospital and Cancer Trials Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. 20. University of Surrey, Guildford, UK. 21. Novartis Oncology, East Hanover, NJ, USA. 22. Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland. 23. Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
Most studies indicate no benefit of adjuvant therapy with VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). PROTECT (NCT01235962) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study to evaluate adjuvant pazopanib in patients with locally advanced RCC at high risk of relapse after nephrectomy (pazopanib, n = 769; placebo, n = 769). The results of the primary analysis showed no difference in disease-free survival between pazopanib 600 mg and placebo. Here we report the final overall survival (OS) analysis (median follow-up: pazopanib, 76 mo, interquartile range [IQR] 66-84; placebo, 77 mo, IQR 69-85). There was no significant difference in OS between the pazopanib and placebo arms (hazard ratio 1.0, 95% confidence interval 0.80-1.26; nominal p > 0.9). OS was worse for patients with T4 disease compared to those with less advanced disease and was better for patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 compared to those with lower BMI. OS was significantly better for patients who remained diseasefree at 2 yr after treatment compared with those who relapsed within 2 yr. These findings are consistent with the primary outcomes from PROTECT, indicating that adjuvant pazopanib does not confer a benefit in terms of OS for patients following resection of locally advanced RCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 PROTECT study, overall survival was similar for patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high risk of relapse after nephrectomy who received adjuvant therapy with pazopanib or placebo. Pazopanib is not recommended as adjuvant therapy following resection of locally advanced RCC. This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01235962.
Most studies indicate no benefit of adjuvant therapy with VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). PROTECT (NCT01235962) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study to evaluate adjuvant pazopanib in patients with locally advanced RCC at high risk of relapse after nephrectomy (pazopanib, n = 769; placebo, n = 769). The results of the primary analysis showed no difference in disease-free survival between pazopanib 600 mg and placebo. Here we report the final overall survival (OS) analysis (median follow-up: pazopanib, 76 mo, interquartile range [IQR] 66-84; placebo, 77 mo, IQR 69-85). There was no significant difference in OS between the pazopanib and placebo arms (hazard ratio 1.0, 95% confidence interval 0.80-1.26; nominal p > 0.9). OS was worse for patients with T4 disease compared to those with less advanced disease and was better for patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 compared to those with lower BMI. OS was significantly better for patients who remained diseasefree at 2 yr after treatment compared with those who relapsed within 2 yr. These findings are consistent with the primary outcomes from PROTECT, indicating that adjuvant pazopanib does not confer a benefit in terms of OS for patients following resection of locally advanced RCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 PROTECT study, overall survival was similar for patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high risk of relapse after nephrectomy who received adjuvant therapy with pazopanib or placebo. Pazopanib is not recommended as adjuvant therapy following resection of locally advanced RCC. This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01235962.
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Naomi B Haas; Frede Donskov; Marine Gross-Goupil; Sergei Varlamov; Evgeny Kopyltsov; Jae Lyun Lee; Bohuslav Melichar; Brian I Rini; Toni K Choueiri; Milada Zemanova; Lori A Wood; M Neil Reaume; Arnulf Stenzl; Simon Chowdhury; Ho Yeong Lim; Ray McDermott; Agnieszka Michael; Weichao Bao; Marlene J Carrasco-Alfonso; Paola Aimone; Maurizio Voi; Christian Doehn; Paul Russo; Cora N Sternberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-09-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Cora N Sternberg; Frede Donskov; Naomi B Haas; Christian Doehn; Paul Russo; Mohamed Elmeliegy; Guillaume Baneyx; Hiya Banerjee; Paola Aimone; Robert J Motzer Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2018-01-12 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Naomi B Haas; Judith Manola; Janice P Dutcher; Keith T Flaherty; Robert G Uzzo; Michael B Atkins; Robert S DiPaola; Toni K Choueiri Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Naomi B Haas; Judith Manola; Robert G Uzzo; Keith T Flaherty; Christopher G Wood; Christopher Kane; Michael Jewett; Janice P Dutcher; Michael B Atkins; Michael Pins; George Wilding; David Cella; Lynne Wagner; Surena Matin; Timothy M Kuzel; Wade J Sexton; Yu-Ning Wong; Toni K Choueiri; Roberto Pili; Igor Puzanov; Manish Kohli; Walter Stadler; Michael Carducci; Robert Coomes; Robert S DiPaola Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: A Ari Hakimi; Helena Furberg; Emily C Zabor; Anders Jacobsen; Nikolaus Schultz; Giovanni Ciriello; Nina Mikklineni; Brandon Fiegoli; Philip H Kim; Martin H Voss; Hui Shen; Peter W Laird; Chris Sander; Victor E Reuter; Robert J Motzer; James J Hsieh; Paul Russo Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: M Gross-Goupil; T G Kwon; M Eto; D Ye; H Miyake; S I Seo; S-S Byun; J L Lee; V Master; J Jin; R DeBenedetto; R Linke; M Casey; B Rosbrook; M Lechuga; O Valota; E Grande; D I Quinn Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Bhavna Oza; Eleni Frangou; Ben Smith; Hanna Bryant; Rick Kaplan; Babak Choodari-Oskooei; Tom Powles; Grant D Stewart; Laurence Albiges; Axel Bex; Toni K Choueiri; Ian D Davis; Tim Eisen; Alison Fielding; David Harrison; Anita McWhirter; Salena Mulhere; Paul Nathan; Brian Rini; Alastair Ritchie; Sarah Scovell; Clare Shakeshaft; Martin R Stockler; Nat Thorogood; Mahesh K B Parmar; James Larkin; Angela Meade Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2021-09-16 Impact factor: 2.226