Assessing the effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib and everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma: insights from the RELIEVE study’s analysis of heavily pretreated patients

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Sebastiano Buti, Alessandro Olivari, Cristina Masini, Davide Bimbatti, Donata Sartori, Paola Ermacora, Carlo Cattrini, Maria Giuseppa Vitale, Ernesto Rossi, Claudia Mucciarini, Mimma Rizzo, Michele Sisani, Matteo Santoni, Giandomenico Roviello, Veronica Mollica, Vincenza Conteduca, Francesco Grillone, Marika Cinausero, Giuseppe Prati, Francesco Atzori, Marco Stellato, Francesco Massari, Melissa Bersanelli
{"title":"Assessing the effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib and everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma: insights from the RELIEVE study’s analysis of heavily pretreated patients","authors":"Sebastiano Buti, Alessandro Olivari, Cristina Masini, Davide Bimbatti, Donata Sartori, Paola Ermacora, Carlo Cattrini, Maria Giuseppa Vitale, Ernesto Rossi, Claudia Mucciarini, Mimma Rizzo, Michele Sisani, Matteo Santoni, Giandomenico Roviello, Veronica Mollica, Vincenza Conteduca, Francesco Grillone, Marika Cinausero, Giuseppe Prati, Francesco Atzori, Marco Stellato, Francesco Massari, Melissa Bersanelli","doi":"10.1177/17562872241244574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background:The treatment of heavily pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) represents an unmet medical need and is still challenging.Objectives:The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination and the secondary objective was the toxicity profile of this combination.Design:We conducted a longitudinal retrospective study examining mRCC patients pre-treated with one or more lines of therapy among different cancer centers in Italy.Methods:The study included patients who received the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus as either a second-line treatment or beyond. We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), and toxicity profile. In addition, we explored the potential relationship between treatment effectiveness and clinical and laboratory parameters.Results:In all, 33 patients were assessed, the median age was 60 years, 57% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1–2 and. 63% received ⩾ 3 prior lines of therapy. 62% were ‘intermediate risk’ according to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium and 30% were ‘poor risk’. The RR was 42% (no complete response), 18% stable disease. Median OS was 11.2 months (95% CI 6.8–19.9), median PFS was 6.7 months (95% CI 0.6–30.8), and median TTF was 6.7 months (95% CI 4.8–16.6). A shorter OS was significantly associated with lymph node metastases ( p = 0.043, 95% CI), neutrophils/ lymphocytes ratio (NLR) ⩾ 3 ( p = 0.007), hemoglobin/red cell distribution width ratio cutoff value <0.7 was significant ( p = 0.03) while a shorter PFS was associated with lung ( p = 0.048) and brain metastases ( p = 0.023). The most frequent G1 toxicity was diarrhea (24%), G2 was fatigue (30%), and hypertension and skin toxicity (6%) for G3.Conclusion:Our findings suggest a clinically relevant effectiveness of lenvatinib plus everolimus combination with an acceptable toxicity profile for heavily pretreated patients with mRCC.","PeriodicalId":23010,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Urology","volume":"179 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562872241244574","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background:The treatment of heavily pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) represents an unmet medical need and is still challenging.Objectives:The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination and the secondary objective was the toxicity profile of this combination.Design:We conducted a longitudinal retrospective study examining mRCC patients pre-treated with one or more lines of therapy among different cancer centers in Italy.Methods:The study included patients who received the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus as either a second-line treatment or beyond. We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), and toxicity profile. In addition, we explored the potential relationship between treatment effectiveness and clinical and laboratory parameters.Results:In all, 33 patients were assessed, the median age was 60 years, 57% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1–2 and. 63% received ⩾ 3 prior lines of therapy. 62% were ‘intermediate risk’ according to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium and 30% were ‘poor risk’. The RR was 42% (no complete response), 18% stable disease. Median OS was 11.2 months (95% CI 6.8–19.9), median PFS was 6.7 months (95% CI 0.6–30.8), and median TTF was 6.7 months (95% CI 4.8–16.6). A shorter OS was significantly associated with lymph node metastases ( p = 0.043, 95% CI), neutrophils/ lymphocytes ratio (NLR) ⩾ 3 ( p = 0.007), hemoglobin/red cell distribution width ratio cutoff value <0.7 was significant ( p = 0.03) while a shorter PFS was associated with lung ( p = 0.048) and brain metastases ( p = 0.023). The most frequent G1 toxicity was diarrhea (24%), G2 was fatigue (30%), and hypertension and skin toxicity (6%) for G3.Conclusion:Our findings suggest a clinically relevant effectiveness of lenvatinib plus everolimus combination with an acceptable toxicity profile for heavily pretreated patients with mRCC.
评估来伐替尼和依维莫司治疗晚期肾细胞癌的有效性和安全性:从RELIEVE研究对重度预处理患者的分析中获得的启示
背景:对接受过大量预处理的转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)患者的治疗是一项尚未满足的医疗需求,目前仍面临挑战。目标:首要目标是评估来伐替尼联合依维莫司的疗效,次要目标是评估这种联合疗法的毒性概况。设计:我们进行了一项纵向回顾性研究,考察了意大利不同癌症中心接受过一线或多线治疗的mRCC患者。方法:研究纳入了接受来伐替尼联合依维莫司二线治疗或二线以上治疗的患者。我们评估了无进展生存期(PFS)、治疗失败时间(TTF)、总生存期(OS)、反应率(RR)和毒性概况。此外,我们还探讨了治疗效果与临床和实验室参数之间的潜在关系。结果:总共有 33 名患者接受了评估,中位年龄为 60 岁,57% 的患者在东部合作肿瘤学组的表现状态为 1-2 级,63% 的患者接受了ɳSm_273↩治疗。63%的患者之前接受过⩾3种治疗。根据国际转移性肾细胞癌数据库联盟(International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium),62%的患者属于 "中危",30%属于 "低危"。RR为42%(无完全反应),18%病情稳定。中位OS为11.2个月(95% CI 6.8-19.9),中位PFS为6.7个月(95% CI 0.6-30.8),中位TTF为6.7个月(95% CI 4.8-16.6)。较短的OS与淋巴结转移(p = 0.043,95% CI)、中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比值(NLR)⩾ 3(p = 0.007)、血红蛋白/红细胞分布宽度比值截断值<0.7显著相关(p = 0.03),而较短的PFS与肺转移(p = 0.048)和脑转移(p = 0.023)相关。最常见的G1毒性为腹泻(24%),G2为疲劳(30%),G3为高血压和皮肤毒性(6%)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Urology delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of urology. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in urology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area. The editors welcome articles of current interest across all areas of urology, including treatment of urological disorders, with a focus on emerging pharmacological therapies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信