Efficacy and safety of vorolanib plus everolimus in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A three-arm, randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase III study (CONCEPT)

作者:Sheng, Xinan*; Ye, DingWei; Zhou, Aiping; Yao, Xin; Luo, Hong; He, Zhisong; Wang, Zengjun; Zhao, Yingchao; Ji, Zhigang; Zou, Qing; He, Chaohong; Guo, Jianming; Tu, Xinhua; Liu, Ziling; Shi, Benkang; Liu, Ben; Chen, Peng; Wei, Qiang; Hu, Zhiquan; Zhang, Yanqiao; Jiang, Kui; Zhou, Fangjian; Wu, Dapeng; Fu, Cheng; Li, Xingya; Wu, Bin; Wang, Lijie; Qin, Shukui; Li, Gang; Liu, Yunpeng; Guo, Hongqian; Chen, Kehe; Zhang, Dahong; Wang, Gongxian; Ding, Lieming; Wang, Yang; Yuan, Xiaobin
来源:European Journal of Cancer, 2023, 178: 205-215.
DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2022.10.025

摘要

Background: Vorolanib is a highly potent tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and platelet-derived growth factor re-ceptor. This three-arm, randomised, registered study aimed to assess the combination of vor-olanib and everolimus or vorolanib alone versus a control arm of everolimus as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).Patients and methods: Patients with advanced or metastatic RCC who had received one prior VEGFR-TKI were randomised (1:1:1) to receive the combination of vorolanib and everolimus or either monotherapy. Patients with brain metastases were excluded. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by the independent review committee per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.1.Results: Between 10th March 2017 and 30th May 2019, 399 patients (133 in each group) were enrolled. By the cutoff date (30th April 2020), a significant improvement in PFS was detected in the combination group compared with the everolimus group (10.0 versus 6.4 months; haz-ard ratio, 0.70; P = 0.0171). PFS was similar between the vorolanib group and the everolimus group (median: 6.4 versus 6.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.94; P = 0.6856). A significantly higher objective response rate was observed in the combination group than in the everolimus group (24.8% versus 8.3%; P = 0.0003), whereas there was no significant difference between the vor-olanib group and the everolimus group (10.5% versus 8.3%; P = 0.5278). The overall survival data were immature. A total of 96 (72.2%), 52 (39.1%) and 71 (53.4%) grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in the combination group, vorolanib group and everolimus group, respectively.Conclusions: The addition of vorolanib to everolimus as 2nd-line treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic RCC who have experienced cancer progression after VEGFR-TKI therapy provided a better objective response rate and PFS than everolimus alone with a manageable safety profile.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03095040; Chinadrugtrials, CTR20160987. 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

  • 单位
    中国医学科学院北京协和医院; 华中科技大学; 吉林大学; 浙江大学; 重庆大学; 南京大学; 中国医科大学; 西安交通大学; 南昌大学; 山东大学; 北京大学; 中山大学; 复旦大学; 哈尔滨医科大学; 郑州大学; 四川大学