Clinical Outcomes Of Axitinib Versus Sunitinib As A First-Line Therapy For Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma In Japanese Patients

You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Advanced (including Drug Therapy) II1 Apr 2018MP66-16 CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF AXITINIB VERSUS SUNITINIB AS A FIRST-LINE THERAPY FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA IN JAPANESE PATIENTS Yusuke Kiso, Takamitsu Inoue, Taketoshi Nara, Sohei Kanda, Kazuyuki Numakura, Hiroshi Tsuruta, Mitsuru Saito, Shintaro Narita, Shigeru Satoh, and Tomonori Habuchi Yusuke KisoYusuke Kiso More articles by this author , Takamitsu InoueTakamitsu Inoue More articles by this author , Taketoshi NaraTaketoshi Nara More articles by this author , Sohei KandaSohei Kanda More articles by this author , Kazuyuki NumakuraKazuyuki Numakura More articles by this author , Hiroshi TsurutaHiroshi Tsuruta More articles by this author , Mitsuru SaitoMitsuru Saito More articles by this author , Shintaro NaritaShintaro Narita More articles by this author , Shigeru SatohShigeru Satoh More articles by this author , and Tomonori HabuchiTomonori Habuchi More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.1888AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The optimal sequence of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapies in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has not been fully understood. We retrospectively compared the clinical outcomes between patients who underwent axitinib or sunitinib as a first-line therapy in patients with mRCC. METHODS From April 2008 to July 2016, 134 patients with mRCC underwent VEGF-targeted sequence therapies in a single institute. The patients with clear cell carcinoma including 49 and 48 patients who underwent sunitinib and axitinib as a first-line therapy were evaluated, respectively. No difference was observed in patient′s backgrounds including MSKCC risk classification at the initiation of the first-line VEGF therapies. RESULTS Patients treated with sunitinib had a higher incidence of drug discontinuation due to ≥ grade 3 adverse events (14.6% vs. 32.6%, p = 0.036) and ≥ grade 3 fatigue (4.1% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.027) as compared with those treated with axitinib. Objective response rate of axitinib was significantly better than that of sunitinib (41.6% vs. 20.4%, p = 0.023). The median progression free survival was significantly longer in patients underwent axitinib therapy as a first-line therapy than that in patients with sunitinib (13.6 months vs. 4.7 months, p = 0.014), and the median time to first-line treatment failure was also significantly longer in the axitinib group than in sunitinib group (11.8 months vs. 3.7 months, p = 0.007). However, no difference was observed in median overall survival between patients underwent axitinib and sunitinib as first-line therapies (22.3 months vs. 20.1 months, p = 0.087). CONCLUSIONS The axitinib as a first-line VEGF-targeted therapy for mRCC had a longer progression free survival and time to treatment failure with less toxic profile than sunitinib but did not extend the overall survival in Japanese retrospective study. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e874 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Yusuke Kiso More articles by this author Takamitsu Inoue More articles by this author Taketoshi Nara More articles by this author Sohei Kanda More articles by this author Kazuyuki Numakura More articles by this author Hiroshi Tsuruta More articles by this author Mitsuru Saito More articles by this author Shintaro Narita More articles by this author Shigeru Satoh More articles by this author Tomonori Habuchi More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...