...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Oncology >Phase II randomized trial comparing sequential first-line everolimus and second-line sunitinib versus first-line sunitinib and second-line everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma
【24h】

Phase II randomized trial comparing sequential first-line everolimus and second-line sunitinib versus first-line sunitinib and second-line everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

机译:II期随机试验比较了转移性肾细胞癌患者一线依维莫司和二线舒尼替尼与一线舒尼替尼和二线依维莫司的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose A multicenter, randomized phase II trial, RECORD-3, was conducted to compare first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression with the standard sequence of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Patients and Methods RECORD-3 used a crossover treatment design. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) noninferiority of first-line everolimus compared with first-line sunitinib. Secondary end points included combined PFS for each sequence, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results Of 471 enrolled patients, 238 were randomly assigned to first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib, and 233 were randomly assigned to first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus. The primary end point was not met; the median PFS was 7.9 months for first-line everolimus and 10.7 months for first-line sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Among patients who discontinued first-line, 108 (45%) crossed over from everolimus to second-line sunitinib, and 99 (43%) crossed over from sunitinib to second-line everolimus. The median combined PFS was 21.1 months for sequential everolimus then sunitinib and was 25.8 months for sequential sunitinib then everolimus (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.7). The median OS was 22.4 months for sequential everolimus and then sunitinib and 32.0 months for sequential sunitinib and then everolimus (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.6). Common treatment-emergent adverse events during first-line everolimus or sunitinib were stomatitis (53% and 57%, respectively), fatigue (45% and 51%, respectively), and diarrhea (38% and 57%, respectively). Conclusion Everolimus did not demonstrate noninferiority compared with sunitinib as a first-line therapy. The trial results support the standard treatment paradigm of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression.
机译:目的进行了一项多中心随机II期临床研究RECORD-3,以比较转移性肾细胞癌患者中一线依维莫司,随后舒尼替尼的进展与一线舒尼替尼后依维莫司的标准序列。患者和方法RECORD-3使用了交叉治疗设计。主要目的是评估一线依维莫司与一线舒尼替尼的无进展生存期(PFS)非劣性。次要终点包括每个序列的组合PFS,总生存期(OS)和安全性。结果纳入的471名患者中,有238名被随机分配到一线依维莫司,然后是舒尼替尼,有233名被随机分配到一线舒尼替尼,然后是依维莫司。没有达到主要终点;一线依维莫司的中位PFS为7.9个月,舒尼替尼一线的中位PFS为10.7个月(危险比[HR]为1.4; 95%CI为1.2至1.8)。在停止一线治疗的患者中,有108名(45%)从依维莫司转为二线舒尼替尼,有99名(43%)从舒尼替尼转为二线依维莫司。先后依维莫司然后舒尼替尼的联合PFS中位数为21.1个月,先后舒尼替尼然后依维莫司为25.8个月(HR,1.3; 95%CI,0.9至1.7)。先后依维莫司然后舒尼替尼的中位OS为22.4个月,先后舒尼替尼然后依维莫司的中位OS为32.0个月(HR,1.2; 95%CI,0.9至1.6)。一线依维莫司或舒尼替尼期间发生的常见治疗不良事件为口腔炎(分别为53%和57%),疲劳(分别为45%和51%)和腹泻(分别为38%和57%)。结论与舒尼替尼作为一线治疗药物相比,依维莫司没有表现出非劣效性。试验结果支持一线舒尼替尼的标准治疗范例,随后是依维莫司。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号