Adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib for high-risk, non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (ECOG-ACRIN E2805): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial

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, 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

Abstract

Background: Renal-cell carcinoma is highly vascular, and proliferates primarily through dysregulation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. We tested sunitinib and sorafenib, two oral anti-angiogenic agents that are effective in advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in patients with resected local disease at high risk for recurrence.

Methods: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients at 226 study centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients had pathological stage high-grade T1b or greater with completely resected non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma and adequate cardiac, renal, and hepatic function. Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computerised double-blind randomisation was done centrally with permuted blocks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 54 weeks of sunitinib 50 mg per day orally throughout the first 4 weeks of each 6 week cycle, sorafenib 400 mg twice per day orally throughout each cycle, or placebo. Placebo could be sunitinib placebo given continuously for 4 weeks of every 6 week cycle or sorafenib placebo given twice per day throughout the study. The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival between each experimental group and placebo in the intention-to-treat population. All treated patients with at least one follow-up assessment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326898.

Findings: Between April 24, 2006, and Sept 1, 2010, 1943 patients from the National Clinical Trials Network were randomly assigned to sunitinib (n=647), sorafenib (n=649), or placebo (n=647). Following high rates of toxicity-related discontinuation after 1323 patients had enrolled (treatment discontinued by 193 [44%] of 438 patients on sunitinib, 199 [45%] of 441 patients on sorafenib), the starting dose of each drug was reduced and then individually titrated up to the original full doses. On Oct 16, 2014, because of low conditional power for the primary endpoint, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and the results be released. The primary analysis showed no significant differences in disease-free survival. Median disease-free survival was 5·8 years (IQR 1·6-8·2) for sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 97·5% CI 0·85-1·23, p=0·8038), 6·1 years (IQR 1·7-not estimable [NE]) for sorafenib (HR 0·97, 97·5% CI 0·80-1·17, p=0·7184), and 6·6 years (IQR 1·5-NE) for placebo. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (105 [17%] patients on sunitinib and 102 [16%] patients on sorafenib), hand-foot syndrome (94 [15%] patients on sunitinib and 208 [33%] patients on sorafenib), rash (15 [2%] patients on sunitinib and 95 [15%] patients on sorafenib), and fatigue 110 [18%] patients on sunitinib [corrected]. There were five deaths related to treatment or occurring within 30 days of the end of treatment; one patient receiving sorafenib died from infectious colitis while on treatment and four patients receiving sunitinib died, with one death due to each of neurological sequelae, sequelae of gastric perforation, pulmonary embolus, and disease progression. Revised dosing still resulted in high toxicity.

Interpretation: Adjuvant treatment with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib or sunitinib showed no survival benefit relative to placebo in a definitive phase 3 study. Furthermore, substantial treatment discontinuation occurred because of excessive toxicity, despite dose reductions. These results provide a strong rationale against the use of these drugs for high-risk kidney cancer in the adjuvant setting and suggest that the biology of cancer recurrence might be independent of angiogenesis.

Funding: US National Cancer Institute and ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Pfizer, and Bayer.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests

JPD reports personal fees for Pfizer consultation. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial profile
Figure 2. Disease-free survival
Figure 2. Disease-free survival
HR=hazard ratio.
Figure 3. Overall survival
Figure 3. Overall survival
HR=hazard ratio.
Figure 4. Disease-free survival in exploratory subgroups
Figure 4. Disease-free survival in exploratory subgroups
Forest plots show hazard ratios and 97·5% CIs for the comparison of sunitinib with placebo (A) and sorafenib with placebo (B). The x axis of the forest plot is scaled in accordance with the natural logarithm of the HR. The size of the squares is proportional to the inverse of the variance of the log hazard ratio, such that smaller squares correspond to largest variance. Race or ethnic origin was self-reported; other race or ethnic origin includes all patients who reported either race or ethnicity as other than white, non-Hispanic, or who did not report race or ethnicity. Intermediate high-risk disease (as stratified at randomisation) was defined as either pathological T1b, grade 3–4, pathological T2, grade 1–4, or pathological T3a, grade 1–2, provided that the pathological T2a grade was not due to adrenal involvement. Patients with other pathological T3–4 disease or any node-positive disease were categorised in the very high-risk group. HR=hazard ratio.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren