BACKGROUND
In a single-group, phase 1b trial, avelumab plus axitinib resulted in objective responses in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This phase 3 trial involving previously untreated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma compared avelumab plus axitinib with the standard-of-care sunitinib.
METHODS
We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive avelumab (10 mg per kilogram of body weight) intravenously every 2 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). The two independent primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival among patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)–positive tumors. A key secondary end point was progression-free survival in the overall population; other end points included objective response and safety.
RESULTS
A total of 886 patients were assigned to receive avelumab plus axitinib (442 patients) or sunitinib (444 patients). Among the 560 patients with PD-L1–positive tumors (63.2%), the median progression-free survival was 13.8 months with avelumab plus axitinib, as compared with 7.2 months with sunitinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.79; P<0.001); in the overall population, the median progression-free survival was 13.8 months, as compared with 8.4 months (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; P<0.001). Among the patients with PD-L1–positive tumors, the objective response rate was 55.2% with avelumab plus axitinib and 25.5% with sunitinib; at a median follow-up for overall survival of 11.6 months and 10.7 months in the two groups, 37 patients and 44 patients had died, respectively. Adverse events during treatment occurred in 99.5% of patients in the avelumab-plus-axitinib group and in 99.3% of patients in the sunitinib group; these events were grade 3 or higher in 71.2% and 71.5% of the patients in the respective groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Progression-free survival was significantly longer with avelumab plus axitinib than with sunitinib among patients who received these agents as first-line treatment for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. (Funded by Pfizer and Merck [Darmstadt, Germany]; JAVELIN Renal 101 ClinicalTrials.gov number, .)
IntroductionAlterations in cell cycle regulators have been implicated in human malignancies including breast cancer. PD 0332991 is an orally active, highly selective inhibitor of the cyclin D kinases (CDK)4 and CDK6 with ability to block retinoblastoma (Rb) phosphorylation in the low nanomolar range. To identify predictors of response, we determined the in vitro sensitivity to PD 0332991 across a panel of molecularly characterized human breast cancer cell lines.MethodsForty-seven human breast cancer and immortalized cell lines representing the known molecular subgroups of breast cancer were treated with PD 0332991 to determine IC50 values. These data were analyzed against baseline gene expression data to identify genes associated with PD 0332991 response.ResultsCell lines representing luminal estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) subtype (including those that are HER2 amplified) were most sensitive to growth inhibition by PD 0332991 while nonluminal/basal subtypes were most resistant. Analysis of variance identified 450 differentially expressed genes between sensitive and resistant cells. pRb and cyclin D1 were elevated and CDKN2A (p16) was decreased in the most sensitive lines. Cell cycle analysis showed G0/G1 arrest in sensitive cell lines and Western blot analysis demonstrated that Rb phosphorylation is blocked in sensitive lines but not resistant lines. PD 0332991 was synergistic with tamoxifen and trastuzumab in ER+ and HER2-amplified cell lines, respectively. PD 0332991 enhanced sensitivity to tamoxifen in cell lines with conditioned resistance to ER blockade.ConclusionsThese studies suggest a role for CDK4/6 inhibition in some breast cancers and identify criteria for patient selection in clinical studies of PD 0332991.
Background:
The phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (
NCT02684006
) demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with first-line avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). We report updated efficacy data from the second interim analysis.
Patients and methods:
Treatment-naive patients with aRCC were randomized (1 : 1) to receive avelumab (10 mg/kg) intravenously every 2 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). The two independent primary end points were PFS and overall survival (OS) among patients with programmed death ligand 1–positive (PD-L1+) tumors. Key secondary end points were OS and PFS in the overall population.
Results:
Of 886 patients, 442 were randomized to the avelumab plus axitinib arm and 444 to the sunitinib arm; 270 and 290 had PD-L1+ tumors, respectively. After a minimum follow-up of 13 months (data cut-off 28 January 2019), PFS was significantly longer in the avelumab plus axitinib arm than in the sunitinib arm {PD-L1+ population: hazard ratio (HR) 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.490–0.777]}; one-sided
P
< 0.0001; median 13.8 (95% CI 10.1–20.7) versus 7.0 months (95% CI 5.7–9.6); overall population: HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.574–0.825); one-sided
P
< 0.0001; median 13.3 (95% CI 11.1–15.3) versus 8.0 months (95% CI 6.7–9.8)]. OS data were immature [PD-L1+ population: HR 0.828 (95% CI 0.596–1.151); one-sided
P
= 0.1301; overall population: HR 0.796 (95% CI 0.616–1.027); one-sided
P
= 0.0392].
Conclusion:
Among patients with previously untreated aRCC, treatment with avelumab plus axitinib continued to result in a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus sunitinib; OS data were still immature.
Clinical Trial number:
NCT02684006
.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.