Close Window ** Close Window *Thank you for choosing to subscribe to the eTOC for Oncology Times UK* Enter your Email address: Wolters Kluwer Health may email you for journal alerts and information, but is committed to maintaining your privacy and will not share your personal information without your express consent. For more information, please refer to our Privacy Policy. Close Window ** Oncology Times UK Wolters Kluwer Health Logo * Login * Register * Activate Subscription * Subscribe * eTOC * Help * Advanced Search * Saved Searches You currently have no recent searches Home Previous Issues Info & Services About the Publication Editorial Board Subscription Services Advertising Reprints Rights and Permissions Mobile New Features US edition Skip Navigation Links <#ctl00_Dummy_PlaceHolderMain_ctl00_ctl00_SkipLink>Home > September 2011 - Volume 8 - Issue 9 > Second-line axitinib versus sorafenib extends progression-fr... < Previous Article | Next Article > Text sizing: A <#> A <#> A <#> Oncology Times UK: September 2011 - Volume 8 - Issue 9 - pp 12-13 doi: 10.1097/01.OTU.0000405446.85753.24 News Second-line axitinib versus sorafenib extends progression-free survival Carlson, Robert H Free Access <#> *Choices in second-line therapy for advanced renal-cell carcinoma have improved – in a Phase III trial comparing axitinib with sorafenib in previously treated patients, axitinib was associated with a two-month improvement in progression-free survival.* The randomised, international Phase III AXIS 1032 study reported at the ASCO Annual Meeting /(Abstract 4503)/ included 723 patients with clear-cell advanced renal cell carcinoma. The researchers, led by Dr Brian Rini, of the department of solid tumour oncology at Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Center, said that this was the first trial to directly compare axitinib, a selective inhibitor of VEGF receptors 1, 2, and 3, and sorafenib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, against each other in relapsed or refractory renal cell carcinoma patients. Patients were previously treated with one prior first-line systemic regimen of sunitinib (54% in each arm), cytokines (35% in each arm), bevacizumab with interferon-alpha (8% each), or temsirolimus (3% each); and 91% of the 361 axitinib and of the 362 sorafenib patients had a prior nephrectomy. Dr Rini reported progression-free survival of 6.7 months with axitinib and 4.7 months for sorafenib. Response was influenced by the previous treatment. Progression-free survival favoured axitinib in both the prior cytokine subgroup (12.1 vs 6.5 months) and the prior sunitinib subgroup (4.8 vs 3.4 months). Dr Brian I Rini... Image Tools Objective response rates were 19.4% for axitinib vs 9.4% for sorafenib. Common adverse events more frequent with axitinib compared with sorafenib were hypertension (40% versus 29%, all grades), fatigue (39% versus 32%), dysphonia (31% vs 14%), and hypothyroidism (19% versus 8%). Adverse events more frequent with sorafenib were hand-foot syndrome (27% versus 51%), rash (13% versus 32%), alopecia (4% versus 32%), and anaemia (4% vs 12%). ‘These data support the hypothesis that the more potent biochemical targeting of the VEGF receptor is associated with superior clinical activity in renal cell carcinoma’, Dr Rini concluded. A head-to-head first-line trial of axitinib and sorafenib in both previously treated and previously untreated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, has now begun, he added. ‘We expect axitinib to be much more active as a first-line therapy since it has shown such good results as a second-line therapy.’ Back to Top <#> | Article Outline Quality-of-life data A secondary objective of AXIS 1032 was to evaluate the effect of axitinib versus sorafenib on kidney cancer specific symptoms and functioning in patients with renal cell carcinoma. These outcomes were presented in a separate report /(Abstract 4504)/ by principal investigator Dr David Cella, professor of the department of medical social sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. Dr Cella said patient-reported health-related quality-of life test scores were similar in both treatment arms, but axitinib showed a 16 to 17 percent risk reduction in a composite endpoint of time to deterioration (TTD), defined as the time to death, disease progression, or a decrease in FKSI (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Kidney Symptom Index) scores, whichever occurred first. Dr Cella concluded that axitinib was associated with improved progression-free survival compared with sorafenib while generally maintaining health-related quality of life, and that the TTD composite endpoint results support the primary efficacy analysis, and indicate the value of progression-free survival in renal cell carcinoma. Back to Top <#> | Article Outline Do we need another TKI? Dr David Cella... Image Tools The discussant for these two papers, Dr Bruce G Redman, clinical professor in the department of internal medicine at the University of Michigan Health System, said that from the data, axitinib is a reasonable option for these patients. But more broadly, he asked: ‘Do we need another TKI?’ The primary objective in the axitinib-versus-sorafenib trial was progression-free survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. He said that in this trial it is important to note that patients received just one prior systemic treatment, with more than half receiving sunitinib and one third a cytokine. The authors concluded that axitinib therapy led to a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival compared with sorafenib, and Dr Redman said these conclusions were well supported by the data: ‘They say this data supports the hypothesis that a more potent–meaning direct TKI targeting the VEGF receptor – is associated with superior clinical activity. I have an alternate conclusion, that axitinib should be considered a reference standard for second-line therapy of advanced renal cell carcinoma, other than for the obvious fact that it is still an investigational agent’, he said. Dr Redman said that axitinib does appear to be well tolerated for metastatic renal cell carcinoma and that he considers axitinib to be a valid treatment option after IL-2, but added that he didn't think that anybody in the US was still using interferon as front line therapy. ‘I say axitinib is a “reasonable” option after prior TKI therapy’, Dr Redman said. But questions remain: * After progression on a ‘good’ TKI, what is the role of a second ‘good’ TKI? * Does it matter if there was clinical benefit to the first TKI in deciding to treat with a second TKI? * Do we need more TKIs or mTOR inhibitors or do we want a new target? Back to Top <#> | Article Outline Reasonable option Dr Rini, interviewed after his presentation, responded to Dr Redman's comment about prior therapy with a TKI or a cytokine, and said that he agreed that because of the biology of the disease, the type of prior therapy has an impact on subsequent therapies. ‘We know that sequential VEGF agents have activity, yet the activity goes down with each agent, as opposed to [patients treated with] prior cytokines, who don't have VEGF therapy exposure, who clearly had the most robust response.’ Dr Rini said he also agreed that it is still not clear whether or not to switch mechanisms – going to an mTOR inhibitor such as everolimus or staying with a VEGF inhibitor for second-line therapy. He also agreed with Dr Redman's suggestion that there might not be a need for more TKIs, but rather for different therapeutic targets, and speculated that axitinib will be the last VEGF TKI developed. ‘I don't think we need to search for even more potent TKIs’, Dr Rini said. ‘I think we've probably maxed out the clinical benefit of that approach, at least as monotherapy.’ Dr Redman had asked about the role of a second TKI after progression on a TKI that produced ‘good’ responses, and Dr Rini said he interpreted ‘good’ to mean a drug that produces superior outcomes, but then said the question hasn't been answered. ‘We haven't really looked at our data to say whether the response to a frontline TKI had an impact on response to either one of the second-line TKIs’, he said. ‘Clinically we have that sense, that a patient who does really well on frontline sunitinib will do really well on their second-line TKI, but there's no data to support that – it's just a clinical sense.’ In fact, he said, he and colleagues presented retrospective data at the ASCO meeting that suggests that that is not the case. ‘To me, it means we have a lot to learn about giving these drugs, especially how to choose a subsequent therapy’, Dr Rini said. In his discussion of the two axitinib presentations, Dr Redman said the important question is whether a delay of progression can be achieved with minimal or acceptable toxicity, and Dr Rini said he also agreed with that. ‘If all axitinib did was give people two more months of toxic living, then I'd be the first to argue that that's not a benefit’, he said. ‘Dave Cella's presentation showed that in fact it was the opposite, that the time-to-progression advantage actually delayed the time-to-symptom variation. ‘To me, that really reinforces the real-world clinical advantage of what we see when we look at a median PFS.’ Back to Top <#> | Article Outline Higher score better Dr Rini corrected one point that Dr Redman had made in his Discussant comments, where he had interpreted one graph to mean that patients felt better and symptoms improved after they discontinued a TKI. But that was a misinterpretation, Dr Rini said: ‘On the slide, a higher score on those scales is better. Those scales showed the scores creeping up over time, because when patients get sick and drop out, their scores are not included. ‘It's the good patients who stay on, so their scores go up. If you look at the scores 28 days after therapy, they were dramatically reduced. Patients who come off therapy, largely for disease progression, feel worse because their disease is worse! ‘Unfortunately, Dr Redman misinterpreted that slide, and came to the opposite conclusion’, he said, adding that he talked with Dr Redman about this after the session. ‘Patients don't feel better when their disease is worse. The overriding thing that makes people feel bad is their disease – if they have worse disease, they feel worse, period.’ © 2011 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. Article Outline Close Window * Quality-of-life data <#P18> * Do we need another TKI? <#P22> * Reasonable option <#P33> * Higher score better <#P44> Close Window Previous Next Additional image features are made available by installing Adobe® Flash™ Email to a Friend Close Window Friend's E-mail is Invalid Your Name: (optional) Your Email: Friend's Email: Separate multiple e-mails with a (;). Message: Thought you might appreciate this item(s) I saw at Oncology Times UK. Send a copy to your email Close Window Your message has been successfully sent to your friend. Close Window Some error has occurred while processing your request. Please try after some time. Add Item(s) to: *An Existing Folder* *A New Folder* Folder Name: Description: The item(s) has been successfully added to "". Login Username or Email: Password: Remember me Help Forgot Password? *Need to Activate a New Subscription?* Recently purchased a subscription? Login orCreate a new account , or... Subscribe Now! Forgot your Password? Close Window Enter and submit the email address you registered with. An email with instructions to reset your password will be sent to that address. Sorry, the specified email address could not be found. Try again. Email: Password Sent Close Window Link to reset your password has been sent to specified email address. Remember me Close Window *What does "Remember me" mean?* By checking this box, you'll stay logged in for 14 days or until you logout. You'll get easier access to your articles, collections, media, and all your other content, even if you close your browser or shut down your computer. To protect your most sensitive data and activities (like changing your password), we'll ask you to re-enter your password when you access these services. *What if I'm on a computer that I share with others?* If you're using a public computer or you share this computer with others, we recommend that you uncheck the "Remember me" box. Article Tools * Article as PDF (150 KB) * Article as EPUB * Print this Article * Email to a Friend * Add to My Favorites * Export to Citation Manager * Request Permissions *Images* * View Images in Gallery * Export All Images to PowerPoint File Export to. End Note Procite Reference Manager Save my selection Related Links * Articles in PubMed by Robert H Carlson * Articles in Google Scholar by Robert H Carlson * Other articles in this journal by Robert H Carlson * Copyright © 2012 * Lippincott Williams & Wilkins * All rights reserved. * Privacy Policy * Terms of Use * NIH Public Access Policy * Subscribe to eTOC * Feedback * LWW Journals