Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

848 - Improved long-term clinical outcomes and safety profile of sunitinib dosing schedule with 4/2 switched to 2/1 in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Date

10 Sep 2017

Session

Poster display session

Presenters

Xingming Zhang

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v295-v329. 10.1093/annonc/mdx371

Authors

X. Zhang, G. Sun, J. Zhao, K. Shu, P. Zhao, J. Liu, Y. Yang, Q. Tang, J. Chen, P. Shen, H. Zeng

Author affiliations

  • Department Of Urology, Institute Of Urology, West China Hospital, 610041 - Chengdu/CN
More

Resources

Abstract 848

Background

Adverse events (AEs) have been a key issue for sunitinib administration with a standard dosing schedule. We aimed to identify the survival benefit and safety of alternative dosage schedules for sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Methods

Clinicopathologic and survival data of patients treated with sunitinib as first-line therapy were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into three groups: a standard dosing schedule (4/2 schedule), alternative dosing schedule (2/1 schedule), and switched dosing schedule (4/2-2/1 schedule). Treatment-related AEs were recorded and evaluated. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and potential risk factors were also analyzed.

Results

A total of 99 patients were included. Seventy-five (75.8%) patients were initially administrated with a 4/2 schedule of sunitinib, while 24 were started with the 2/1 schedule. During treatment, 45 (60.0%) patients with an initial 4/2 schedule switched to a 2/1 schedule (4/2-2/1 schedule) due to severe AEs or poor tolerance. The median follow-up time was 37 months. Compared to that with a 4/2 schedule, patients with a 2/1 schedule had a much lower incidence of grade 3/4 AEs (69.6% vs. 40.6%, p = 0.001). Overall, the 4/2-2/1 schedule was associated with the best survival benefits. Among the 4/2, 2/1, and 4/2-2/1 schedule groups, the median PFS was 12.5, 11.0, and 25.0 months, respectively (p = 0.003), and the median OS was 21.0, 28.0, and 52.0 months, respectively (p = 0.030). Multivariate analysis identified the 4/2-2/1 schedule as an independent factor predicting favorable PFS. Although without statistical significance, 4/2-2/1 schedule could decrease 55% risk of death. Furthermore, patients with unfavorable IMDC risk seemed to have more opportunity to achieve better survival from the 4/2-2/1 dosing schedule.

Conclusions

Among the three dosing schedules in the treatment of mRCC, patients with a 4/2-2/1 schedule could minimize treatment-related toxicities; more importantly, patients with 4/2-2/1 schedule could achieve a superior survival benefit. However, prospective clinical trials are required to identify the optimal sunitinib schedule.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Sichuan University

Funding

This work was supported by Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC 81402110 from Pengfei Shen and NSFC 81672547 from Hao Zeng) and Science and Technology Support Program of Sichuan Province (2015SZ0230-3, Hao Zeng).

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.