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

3845 - Sunitinib Versus Pazopanib for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Two Turkish Hospital Experience, A Retrospective Comparative Case Series Study

Date

10 Sep 2017

Session

Poster display session

Presenters

Meltem Ekenel

Citation

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

Authors

M. Ekenel1, E. Aydin1, I. Cil2, A. Zirtiloglu2, D. Tural2, S. Karabulut2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, Istanbul University Institute of Oncology, 34093 - Istanbul/TR
  • 2 Medical Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Bakirkoy Dr Sadi Konuk Education and Research Hospital, 34000 - Istanbul/TR
More

Resources

Abstract 3845

Background

Pazopanib (PAZ) and Sunitinib (SUN), are two oral multikinase angiogenesis inhibitors which are prescribed frequently. However, the outcomes in real world of Turkish population have not extensively been studied.

Methods

Patients assessed retrospectively at two Turkish hospitals between 2006 and 2016.

Results

Median age of patients was 60 (28-87) years and 70% of patients were male. ECOG performance score was 0 and 1 in 73% of patients. Twelve patients (15%) had non-clear cell carcinoma histology. Pathological characteristics, MSKCC risk groups, median follow up, response rates and survival are shown in Table. In the SUN group, the patients had more grade 3-4 adverse events (Table).Table:

885P Patient characteristics, responses to treatment, survival, and adverse events

Sunitinib (n = 41)Pazopanib (n = 38)p value
MSKCC risk groupFavorable 31% Intermediate 56% Poor 12.5%Favorable 31% Intermediate 47% Poor 21%p = 0.66
T3-T4 stage49%47%p = 0.38
Node positivity (%)20%8%p = 0.10
Local recurrence (%)20%30%p = 0.36
Median follow-up18 months13 monthsp = 0.21
ORR34%37%p = 0.96
DCR78%87%p = 0.046
Progression73% (n = 30)50% (n = 19)p = 0.08
Median PFS8months8monthsp = 0.49
Median OS22 months21 monthsp = 0.21
Fatigue, all grades45%74%p = 0.48
Skin changes, all grades44%44%p = 0.24
Anemia, all grades35%42%p = 0.75
Grade 3-4 adverse events59%16%p 

Conclusions

In our study, there was no difference in terms of survival between two agents. However, patients treated with SUN had more grade 3-4 adverse effects which prompted dose reduction and cessation.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Individuals, Meltem Ekenel and Senem Karabulut

Funding

None

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.