BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 METEOR trial, cabozantinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus everolimus in patients with advanced RCC after prior antiangiogenic therapy. METHODS: In this exploratory analysis, plasma biomarkers from baseline and week 4 from 621 of 658 randomized patients were analyzed for CA9, HGF, MET, GAS6, AXL, VEGF, VEGFR2, and IL-8. PFS and OS were analyzed by baseline biomarker levels as both dichotomized and continuous variables using univariate and multivariable methods. For on-treatment changes, PFS and OS were analyzed using fold change in biomarker levels at week 4. Biomarkers were considered prognostic if p < 0.05 and predictive if pinteraction < 0.05 for the interaction between treatment and biomarker. RESULTS:Hazard ratios for PFS and OS favored cabozantinib versus everolimus for both low and high baseline levels of all biomarkers (hazard ratios ≤0.78). In univariate analyses, low baseline HGF, AXL, and VEGF were prognostic for improvements in both PFS and OS with cabozantinib, and low HGF was prognostic for improvements in both PFS and OS with everolimus. Low AXL was predictive of relative improvement in PFS for cabozantinib versus everolimus. Results were generally consistent when baseline biomarkers were expressed as continuous variables, although none were predictive of benefit with treatment. In multivariable analysis, low baseline HGF was independently prognostic for improved PFS for both cabozantinib and everolimus; low HGF, GAS6, and VEGF were independently prognostic for improved OS with cabozantinib. No biomarkers were independently prognostic for OS with everolimus. On-treatment increases in some biomarkers appeared prognostic for PFS or OS with cabozantinib in univariate analyses; however, none were independently prognostic in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS:PFS and OS were improved with cabozantinib versus everolimus at high and low baseline levels of all biomarkers. Low baseline HGF was consistently identified as a prognostic biomarker for improved PFS or OS with cabozantinib or everolimus, supporting further prospective evaluation of the prognostic significance of HGF in advanced RCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01865747 (registered on 05/31/2013).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 METEOR trial, cabozantinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus everolimus in patients with advanced RCC after prior antiangiogenic therapy. METHODS: In this exploratory analysis, plasma biomarkers from baseline and week 4 from 621 of 658 randomized patients were analyzed for CA9, HGF, MET, GAS6, AXL, VEGF, VEGFR2, and IL-8. PFS and OS were analyzed by baseline biomarker levels as both dichotomized and continuous variables using univariate and multivariable methods. For on-treatment changes, PFS and OS were analyzed using fold change in biomarker levels at week 4. Biomarkers were considered prognostic if p < 0.05 and predictive if pinteraction < 0.05 for the interaction between treatment and biomarker. RESULTS: Hazard ratios for PFS and OS favored cabozantinib versus everolimus for both low and high baseline levels of all biomarkers (hazard ratios ≤0.78). In univariate analyses, low baseline HGF, AXL, and VEGF were prognostic for improvements in both PFS and OS with cabozantinib, and low HGF was prognostic for improvements in both PFS and OS with everolimus. Low AXL was predictive of relative improvement in PFS for cabozantinib versus everolimus. Results were generally consistent when baseline biomarkers were expressed as continuous variables, although none were predictive of benefit with treatment. In multivariable analysis, low baseline HGF was independently prognostic for improved PFS for both cabozantinib and everolimus; low HGF, GAS6, and VEGF were independently prognostic for improved OS with cabozantinib. No biomarkers were independently prognostic for OS with everolimus. On-treatment increases in some biomarkers appeared prognostic for PFS or OS with cabozantinib in univariate analyses; however, none were independently prognostic in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: PFS and OS were improved with cabozantinib versus everolimus at high and low baseline levels of all biomarkers. Low baseline HGF was consistently identified as a prognostic biomarker for improved PFS or OS with cabozantinib or everolimus, supporting further prospective evaluation of the prognostic significance of HGF in advanced RCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01865747 (registered on 05/31/2013).
Authors: Toni K Choueiri; Bernard Escudier; Thomas Powles; Paul N Mainwaring; Brian I Rini; Frede Donskov; Hans Hammers; Thomas E Hutson; Jae-Lyun Lee; Katriina Peltola; Bruce J Roth; Georg A Bjarnason; Lajos Géczi; Bhumsuk Keam; Pablo Maroto; Daniel Y C Heng; Manuela Schmidinger; Philip W Kantoff; Anne Borgman-Hagey; Colin Hessel; Christian Scheffold; Gisela M Schwab; Nizar M Tannir; Robert J Motzer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Toni K Choueiri; Bernard Escudier; Thomas Powles; Nizar M Tannir; Paul N Mainwaring; Brian I Rini; Hans J Hammers; Frede Donskov; Bruce J Roth; Katriina Peltola; Jae Lyun Lee; Daniel Y C Heng; Manuela Schmidinger; Neeraj Agarwal; Cora N Sternberg; David F McDermott; Dana T Aftab; Colin Hessel; Christian Scheffold; Gisela Schwab; Thomas E Hutson; Sumanta Pal; Robert J Motzer Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2016-06-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: F Michael Yakes; Jason Chen; Jenny Tan; Kyoko Yamaguchi; Yongchang Shi; Peiwen Yu; Fawn Qian; Felix Chu; Frauke Bentzien; Belinda Cancilla; Jessica Orf; Andrew You; A Douglas Laird; Stefan Engst; Lillian Lee; Justin Lesch; Yu-Chien Chou; Alison H Joly Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2011-09-16 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Erinn B Rankin; Katherine C Fuh; Laura Castellini; Kartik Viswanathan; Elizabeth C Finger; Anh N Diep; Edward L LaGory; Mihalis S Kariolis; Andy Chan; David Lindgren; Håkan Axelson; Yu R Miao; Adam J Krieg; Amato J Giaccia Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Michael L Nickerson; Erich Jaeger; Yangu Shi; Jeffrey A Durocher; Sunil Mahurkar; David Zaridze; Vsevolod Matveev; Vladimir Janout; Hellena Kollarova; Vladimir Bencko; Marie Navratilova; Neonilia Szeszenia-Dabrowska; Dana Mates; Anush Mukeria; Ivana Holcatova; Laura S Schmidt; Jorge R Toro; Sara Karami; Rayjean Hung; Gary F Gerard; W Marston Linehan; Maria Merino; Berton Zbar; Paolo Boffetta; Paul Brennan; Nathaniel Rothman; Wong-Ho Chow; Frederic M Waldman; Lee E Moore Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-08-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Selma Pennacchietti; Paolo Michieli; Maria Galluzzo; Massimiliano Mazzone; Silvia Giordano; Paolo M Comoglio Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Toni K Choueiri; Colin Hessel; Susan Halabi; Ben Sanford; M Dror Michaelson; Olwen Hahn; Meghara Walsh; Thomas Olencki; Joel Picus; Eric J Small; Shaker Dakhil; Darren R Feldman; Milan Mangeshkar; Christian Scheffold; Daniel George; Michael J Morris Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Sara Elena Rebuzzi; Luigi Cerbone; Alessio Signori; Matteo Santoni; Veronica Murianni; Ugo De Giorgi; Giuseppe Procopio; Camillo Porta; Michele Milella; Umberto Basso; Francesco Massari; Marco Maruzzo; Roberto Iacovelli; Nicola Battelli; Luca Carmisciano; Giuseppe Luigi Banna; Sebastiano Buti; Giuseppe Fornarini Journal: Ther Adv Med Oncol Date: 2022-02-26 Impact factor: 8.168