mechanism | treatment | Demonstrated benefit and harm | k | | | |
---|
angiogenesis inhibitors | bevacizumab | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
CALGB 90206, 2010 | bevacizumab plus interferon alfa vs interferon alpha | PFS 0,71 [0,61; 0,83] | | OS 0,86 [0,73; 1,01] | AVOREN, 2007 | bevacizumab plus interferon alfa vs interferon alpha | PFS 0,63 [0,52; 0,76] | | OS 0,86 [0,72; 1,03] | Yang, 2003 | bevacizumab vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
CALGB 90206, 2010 | bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus IFN- (9 million units subcutaneously
three times weekly) (n=369) vs. same dose and schedule of IFN- monotherapy (n=363) | Patients with previously untreated, metastatic clear cell RCC | Parallel groups Sample size: 369/363 Primary endpoint: OS FU duration: | AVOREN, 2007 | bevacizumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) plus IFN (9 MIU subcutaneously three times a week) (n=327) vs. IFN plus placebo (n=322) | patients with previously untreated mRCC | Sample size: 327/322 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Yang, 2003 | bevacizumab at doses of 3 and 10 mg per kilogram of body weight, given every two weeks (n=76) vs. placebo (n=40) | patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma | Parallel groups Sample size: 76/40 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
immune checkpoint inhibition | nivolumab | versus nivolumab + ipilimumab superior to sunitinib in terms of OS in CheckMate-214, 2017 (1L patients) | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Chekmate 025 (Motzer), 2015 | nivolumab vs everolimus | OS 0,73 [0,57; 0,93] median 25.0 mo vs. 19.6 mo | | PFS 0,88 [0,75; 1,03] median 4.6 mo vs. 4.4 mo | CheckMate-214, 2017 | nivolumab + ipilimumab vs sunitinib | OS 0,68 [0,49; 0,95] median not reached vs. 32.9 mo Demonstrated | | PFS 0,82 [0,64; 1,05] median 11.56 mo vs. 8.38 mo |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Chekmate 025 (Motzer), 2015 | 3 mg of nivolumab per kilogram of body weight intravenously every 2 weeks (n=-9) vs. 10-mg everolimus tablet orally once daily (n=-9) | patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma for which they had received previous treatment with one or two regimens of antiangiogenic therapy | open-label Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: OS FU duration: | CheckMate-214, 2017 | nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses followed by Opdivo 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=-9) vs. sunitinib 50 mg once daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off before continuation of treatment (n=-9) | intermediate and poor-risk patients previously untreated advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma | open-label Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: ORR, PFS, OS FU duration: phase 3 |
|
multi target TKI | apitolisib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Powles, 2014 | apitolisib vs everolimus | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Powles, 2014 | (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
multi target TKI | axitinib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AXIS (Rini), 2011 | axitinib vs sorafenib | PFS 0,67 [0,54; 0,81] | | | Qin, 2012 | axitinib vs sorafenib | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AXIS (Rini), 2011 | axitinib (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | second-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Qin, 2012 | (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
multi target TKI | cabozantinib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
METEOR, 2015 | cabozantinib vs everolimus | OS 0,67 [0,51; 0,89] PFS 0,58 [0,45; 0,75] | | | CABOSUN, 2017 | cabozantinib vs sunitinib | PFS 0,66 [0,46; 0,95] median 8.2 mo vs. 5.6 mo | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
METEOR, 2015 | cabozantinib at a dose of 60 mg
daily (n=330) vs. everolimus at a dose of 10 mg daily (n=328) | patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy | open-label Parallel groups Sample size: 330/328 Primary endpoint: PFS FU duration: phase 3 | CABOSUN, 2017 | cabozantinib (60 mg once per day) (n=79) vs. sunitinib (50 mg once per day; 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). (n=78) | untreated clear cell mRCC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 and were intermediate or poor risk per International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria | open-label Parallel groups Sample size: 79/78 Primary endpoint: PFS FU duration: phase 2 |
|
multi target TKI | dovitinib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
GOLD | dovitinib vs sorafenib | | | PFS 0,86 [0,72; 1,03] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
GOLD | dovitinib (500 mg orally according to a 5-days-on and 2-days-off schedule) (n=284) vs. sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) (n=286) | patients with clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received one previous VEGF-targeted therapy and one previous mTOR inhibitor | open-label Sample size: 284/286 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
multi target TKI | pazopanib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Sternberg, 2010 | pazopanib vs placebo | PFS 0,46 [0,34; 0,62] | | | VEG105192, 2010 | pazopanib vs placebo | PFS 0,46 [0,34; 0,62] | | OS 0,91 [0,71; 1,16] | COMPARZ, 2013 | pazopanib vs sunitinib | | | OS 0,91 [0,76; 1,08] PFS 1,05 [0,90; 1,22] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Sternberg, 2010 | pazopanib (n=-9) vs. placebo (n=-9) | treatment-naive and cytokine-pretreated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: PFS FU duration: | VEG105192, 2010 | (n=290) vs. (n=145) | treatment-naive and
cytokine-pretreated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma | Sample size: 290/145 Primary endpoint: PFS FU duration: | COMPARZ, 2013 | continuous dose of pazopanib (800 mg once daily) (n=557) vs. sunitinib in 6-week cycles (50 mg once daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks without treatment) (n=553) | patients with clear-cell, metastatic renal-cell carcinoma, first line | Parallel groups Sample size: 557/553 Primary endpoint: PFS FU duration: |
|
multi target TKI | sorafenib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Escudier, 2009 | sorafenib vs interferon alpha | | | PFS 0,88 [0,61; 1,27] | TARGET, 2007 | sorafenib vs placebo | PFS 0,44 [0,35; 0,55] | | OS 0,88 [0,74; 1,04] | Ratain, 2006 | sorafenib vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Escudier, 2009 | oral sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (n=97) vs. subcutaneous IFN--2a 9 million U three times weekly (n=92) | patients with untreated, advanced renal cancer. | Parallel groups Sample size: 97/92 Primary endpoint: FU duration: phase 2 | TARGET, 2007 | continuous treatment with oral sorafenib (at a dose of 400 mg twice daily) (n=451) vs. placebo (n=452) | patients with renal-cell carcinoma that was resistant to standard therapy | Parallel groups Sample size: 451/452 Primary endpoint: OS FU duration: | Ratain, 2006 | (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
multi target TKI | sunitinib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Motzer, 2007 | sunitinib vs interferon alpha | PFS 0,42 [0,32; 0,55] | | OS 0,82 [0,67; 1,00] | SWITCH | sunitinib vs sorafenib | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Motzer, 2007 | repeated 6-week cycles of sunitinib (at a dose of 50 mg given orally once daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks without treatment) (n=375) vs. interferon alfa (at a dose of 9 MU given subcutaneously three times weekly). (n=375) | patients with previously untreated, metastatic renal-cell carcinoma | Sample size: 375/375 Primary endpoint: PFS FU duration: | SWITCH | (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
multi target TKI | tivozanib | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
TIVO-1, 2013 | tivozanib vs sorafenib | PFS 0,80 [0,64; 0,99] | | OS 1,25 [0,95; 1,63] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
TIVO-1, 2013 | tivozanib (n=260) vs. sorafenib (n=257) | initial targeted therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma | Sample size: 260/257 Primary endpoint: PFS FU duration: |
|