Randomized, controlled, double-blind, cross-over trial assessing treatment preference for pazopanib versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: PISCES Study.

J Clin Oncol

Bernard Escudier, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif; Emmanuel Sevin, Centre François Baclesse, Caen; Sylvie Négrier, Leon Berard Cancer Center, Lyon, France; Camillo Porta, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Policlinico S. Matteo, Pavia; Cora N. Sternberg, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome; Ugo De Giorgi, IRCCS Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, Meldola, Italy; Petri Bono, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; Thomas Powles, Barts Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London; Tim Eisen, Cambridge University Health Partners, Cambridge; Omi Parikh, Royal Preston Hospital, Lancashire; Robert Hawkins, Christie Cancer Research UK, Manchester; Sadya Khan, Jose Diaz, and Faisal Mehmud, GlaxoSmithKline, Uxbridge, United Kingdom; Jürgen E. Gschwend, Klinikum Rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, Munich, Germany; Suman Redhu, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, PA; and David Cella, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL.

Published: May 2014

Purpose: Patient-reported outcomes may help inform treatment choice in advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), particularly between approved targeted therapies with similar efficacy. This double-blind cross-over study evaluated patient preference for pazopanib or sunitinib and the influence of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and safety factors on their stated preference.

Patients And Methods: Patients with metastatic RCC were randomly assigned to pazopanib 800 mg per day for 10 weeks, a 2-week washout, and then sunitinib 50 mg per day (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off, 4 weeks on) for 10 weeks, or the reverse sequence. The primary end point, patient preference for a specific treatment, was assessed by questionnaire at the end of the two treatment periods. Other end points and analyses included reasons for preference, physician preference, safety, and HRQoL.

Results: Of 169 randomly assigned patients, 114 met the following prespecified modified intent-to-treat criteria for the primary analysis: exposure to both treatments, no disease progression before cross over, and completion of the preference questionnaire. Significantly more patients preferred pazopanib (70%) over sunitinib (22%); 8% expressed no preference (P < .001). All preplanned sensitivity analyses, including the intent-to-treat population, statistically favored pazopanib. Less fatigue and better overall quality of life were the main reasons for preferring pazopanib, with less diarrhea being the most cited reason for preferring sunitinib. Physicians also preferred pazopanib (61%) over sunitinib (22%); 17% expressed no preference. Adverse events were consistent with each drug's known profile. Pazopanib was superior to sunitinib in HRQoL measures evaluating fatigue, hand/foot soreness, and mouth/throat soreness.

Conclusion: This innovative cross-over trial demonstrated a significant patient preference for pazopanib over sunitinib, with HRQoL and safety as key influencing factors.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.50.8267DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

preference pazopanib
12
patient preference
12
weeks weeks
12
preference
9
pazopanib
9
double-blind cross-over
8
cross-over trial
8
sunitinib
8
patients metastatic
8
renal cell
8

Similar Publications

Article Synopsis
  • * This study analyzed the effectiveness of two treatments, pazopanib and sunitinib, in non-ccRCC patients across 22 hospitals, looking at progression-free survival, overall survival, and patient response rates.
  • * The findings suggest that pazopanib and sunitinib have similar efficacy, with specific patient characteristics affecting outcomes; pazopanib could be considered a viable treatment option alongside sunitinib and cabozantinib.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Targeting of angiogenesis has become a major therapeutic approach for the treatment of various advanced cancers. There are many unresolved questions on the toxicity of anti-angiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs).

Objective: We performed a meta-analysis to assess the toxicity prevalence of the different anti-angiogenic TKIs among cancer patients and in subpopulations of interest including patients with renal cell carcinoma.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The treatment landscape of advanced kidney cancer has radically changed over the years. Targeting tumor angiogenesis from historical cytokines to multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitors and recently the advent of immunotherapy resulted in a radical improvement in survival but presented substantial challenges in terms of toxicity management. In countries where the access to immune checkpoints inhibitors is still very limited, tyrosine-kinase inhibitors remain the optimal choice.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The Evolving Treatment Landscape of Medullary Thyroid Cancer.

Curr Treat Options Oncol

December 2023

Medical Oncology Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia at ASST Spedali Civili, 25123, Brescia, Italy.

Genetic assessment is crucial to address the correct treatment for advanced medullary thyroid cancer (MTC). Multi tyrosine kinase inhibitors (mTKIs) cabozantinib and vandetanib are good first line options, even vandetanib prescription is currently limited to RET mutated patients. Selective RET inhibitors such as pralsetinib could be a preferred upfront treatment in case of RET mutated MTC presenting common or gatekeeper RET mutations (e.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Antiangiogenics in Malignant Granular Cell Tumors: Review of the Literature.

Cancers (Basel)

October 2023

Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria Fundacion Jimenez Diaz (IIS/FJD), 28015 Madrid, Spain.

Article Synopsis
  • * Pazopanib is the most commonly used systemic therapy for GCTs, showing disease control in 80% of patients and an objective response in 40% during a median treatment time of seven months.
  • * Molecular studies indicate that the effectiveness of pazopanib may be linked to genetic factors that enhance certain signaling pathways, and while there are other targeted therapies, pazopanib remains a promising treatment option for advanced GCTs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!