13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Tivozanib: is total VEGFR inhibition the way to success in terms of tolerability and efficacy in advanced kidney cancer?

      brief-report
      1 , , 1 , 2
      Translational Andrology and Urology
      AME Publishing Company

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The family of tyrosine kinase inhibitors is still growing. After sunitinib, sorafenib and more recently pazopanib, and axitinib, we probably now should count on tivozanib (1). This pan-VEGFR inhibitor (VEGF-R1,-R2,-R3) is more selective and potent in vitro than previous known TK inhibitors. Tivozanib was tested in a phase II trial reported by Nosov et al. (1) Tivozanib was administered at a daily dose of 1.5 mg, for 3 weeks followed by a break of 1 week. Of the 272 patients treated during the first period of 16 weeks, 78, who presented tumour shrinkage of at least 25%, were maintained on tivozanib. All of the 118 patients who presented less than 25% change in the tumour, were randomized between placebo and tivozanib, during the next 12 weeks. Finally, 76 patients discontinued the treatment and were excluded from the analysis, mainly due to progressive disease (50/76). The main clinical characteristics include clear cell histology (83%), and prior nephrectomy (73%) with no previous treatment (54%). Considering all the patients, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) were 11.7 and 24% respectively. Results may be considered according to the two sequential periods of treatment. The ORR during the sixteen week open-label period reached 18% (95%CI, 14-23%), with 66% of stable disease (SD). At the end of the second double-blind period, significantly more patients in the tivozanib arm (49%, n=30) were progression-free, compared with the placebo-arm (21%, n=12), (P=0,001); median progression-free survival was also statistically longer in the tivozanib arm compared to placebo, 11.9 months (9.3-14.7 months) and 9.1 (7.3-9.5) respectively, HR=0.797, P=0.042. The ORR were 33% and 23% in the two groups respectively, P=0.014. In terms of toxicity, the hypothesis suggesting that the specificity of the target would permit a decrease in off-targeted toxicity was confirmed with less adverse events apart from hypertension, a class effect. The two more frequent adverse effects of any grade reported were: hypertension (45%), and dysphonia (22%). Other toxicities, frequently reported with other TKIs, such as asthenia, diarrhea, stomatitis or hand-foot syndrome, were reported in 10%, 12%, 4% and 4% respectively, all grades. Dose-reduction concerned only 8% of the patients, and interruptions 4% (n=11). According to the data, the authors concluded that tivozanib demonstrated promising activity and an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. Furthermore, these results are in accordance with the data presented by Robert Motzer at the ASCO 2012 meeting concerning a phase III trial, comparing tivozanib and sorafenib in the first-line setting (2). The same schedule of tivozanib was compared to 400 mg, twice daily of sorafenib continuously. The trial demonstrated a statistically significant benefit in progression-free survival in the 260 patients treated with tivozanib compared to the sorafenib group (n=257): 11.9 months (9.3-14.7 months) and 9.1 months (7.3-9.5 months) respectively, HR=0.797, P=0.042. The toxicity profile was as expected according to the results of this phase II trial, with 26% of grade 3/4 hypertension, and 21% of grade 3/4 dysphonia. The incidence of hypertension should be interpreted along with previous data reporting this effect, as a biomarker of pharmacological activity. Furthermore, its predictive role of a therapeutic effect, with sunitinib and more recently with axitinib has also been reported (3,4). Lastly, the safer toxicity profile may allow better exposure of the patient to the drug. However, the recent titration data concerning axitinib has begun to shed light on the question of the fixed pre-defined dose of tyrosine kinase agents. In conclusion, tivozanib is really a new anti-angiogenic drug in the landscape of treatment in RCC and not only a me-too drug as sunitinib, sorafenib and pazopanib are. The next challenge is the position in 1st line between tivozanib and axitinib, waiting for forthcoming planned trials.

          Related collections

          Most cited references2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Hypertension as a Biomarker of Efficacy in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Sunitinib

          Background Hypertension (HTN) is an on-target effect of the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitor, sunitinib. We evaluated the association of sunitinib-induced HTN with antitumor efficacy and HTN-associated adverse events in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Methods This retrospective analysis included pooled efficacy (n = 544) and safety (n = 4917) data from four studies of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who were treated with sunitinib 50 mg/d administered on a 4-week-on 2-week-off schedule (schedule 4/2). Blood pressure (BP) was measured in the clinic on days 1 and 28 of each 6-week cycle. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan–Meier methods; hazard ratios (HRs) for survival were also estimated by a Cox proportional hazards models using HTN as a time-dependent covariate. Efficacy outcomes were compared between patients with and without HTN (maximum systolic BP [SBP] ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic BP [DBP] ≥90 mm Hg). Adverse events were also compared between patients with and without HTN (mean SBP ≥140 mm Hg or mean DBP ≥90 mm Hg). All P values were two-sided. Results Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and sunitinib-induced HTN defined by maximum SBP had better outcomes than those without treatment-induced HTN (objective response rate: 54.8% vs 8.7%; median PFS: 12.5 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 10.9 to 13.7 vs 2.5 months, 95% CI = 2.3 to 3.8 months; and OS: 30.9 months, 95% CI = 27.9 to 33.7 vs 7.2 months, 95% CI = 5.6 to 10.7 months; P < .001 for all). Similar results were obtained when comparing patients with vs without sunitinib-induced HTN defined by maximum DBP. In a Cox proportional hazards model using HTN as a time-dependent covariate, PFS (HR of disease progression or death = .603, 95% CI = .451 to .805; P < .001) and OS (HR of death = .332, 95% CI = .252 to .436; P < .001) were improved in patients with treatment-induced HTN defined by maximum SBP; OS (HR of death = .585, 95% CI = .463 to .740; P < .001) was improved in patients with treatment-induced HTN defined by maximum DBP, but PFS was not. Few any-cause cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, ocular, and renal adverse events were observed. Rates of adverse events were similar between patients with and without HTN defined by mean SBP; however, hypertensive patients had somewhat more renal adverse events (5% vs 3%; P = .013). Conclusions In patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib-associated HTN is associated with improved clinical outcomes without clinically significant increases in HTN-associated adverse events, supporting its viability as an efficacy biomarker.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Antitumor activity and safety of tivozanib (AV-951) in a phase II randomized discontinuation trial in patients with renal cell carcinoma.

            The antitumor activity and safety of tivozanib, which is a potent and selective vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1, -2, and -3 inhibitor, was assessed in patients with advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In this phase II, randomized discontinuation trial, 272 patients received open-label tivozanib 1.5 mg/d (one cycle equaled three treatment weeks followed by a 1-week break) orally for 16 weeks. Thereafter, 78 patients who demonstrated ≥ 25% tumor shrinkage continued to take tivozanib, and 118 patients with less than 25% tumor change were randomly assigned to receive tivozanib or a placebo in a double-blind manner; patients with ≥ 25% tumor growth were discontinued. Primary end points included safety, the objective response rate (ORR) at 16 weeks, and the percentage of randomly assigned patients who remained progression free after 12 weeks of double-blind treatment; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS). Of 272 patients enrolled onto the study, 83% of patients had clear-cell histology, 73% of patients had undergone nephrectomy, and 54% of patients were treatment naive. The ORR after 16 weeks of tivozanib treatment was 18% (95% CI, 14% to 23%). Of the 118 randomized patients, significantly more patients who were randomly assigned to receive double-blind tivozanib remained progression free after 12 weeks versus patients who received the placebo (49% v 21%; P = .001). Throughout the study, the ORR was 24% (95% CI, 19% to 30%), and the median PFS was 11.7 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 14.3 months) in the overall study population. The most common grade 3 and 4 treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (12%). Tivozanib was active and well tolerated in patients with advanced RCC. These data support additional development of tivozanib in advanced RCC.
              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Journal
              Transl Androl Urol
              Transl Androl Urol
              TAU
              Translational Andrology and Urology
              AME Publishing Company
              2223-4691
              September 2012
              September 2012
              : 1
              : 3
              : 197-198
              Affiliations
              Saint-André Hospital, University Hospital, Bordeaux, France ; Université Bordeaux 2, Victor Segalen, Bordeaux, France
              Author notes
              Correspondence to: Marine Gross-Goupil, MD, PhD. Saint-André Hospital, University Hospital, Bordeaux, France. Email: marine.gross-goupil@ 123456chu-bordeaux.fr .
              Article
              tau-01-03-197
              10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2012.06.06
              4708244
              a1e60bc8-4ca1-48eb-bf59-581c51d8a60b
              2012 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved.
              History
              : 15 May 2012
              : 27 June 2012
              Categories
              Research Highlight

              Comments

              Comment on this article