1
|
Collinson F, Royle KL, Swain J, Ralph C, Maraveyas A, Eisen T, Nathan P, Jones R, Meads D, Min Wah T, Martin A, Bestall J, Kelly-Morland C, Linsley C, Oughton J, Chan K, Theodoulou E, Arias-Pinilla G, Kwan A, Daverede L, Handforth C, Trainor S, Salawu A, McCabe C, Goh V, Buckley D, Hewison J, Gregory W, Selby P, Brown J, Brown J. Temporary treatment cessation compared with continuation of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for adults with renal cancer: the STAR non-inferiority RCT. Health Technol Assess 2024; 28:1-171. [PMID: 39250424 PMCID: PMC11403377 DOI: 10.3310/jwtr4127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/11/2024] Open
Abstract
Background There is interest in using treatment breaks in oncology, to reduce toxicity without compromising efficacy. Trial design A Phase II/III multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial assessing treatment breaks in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Methods Patients with locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma, starting tyrosine kinase inhibitor as first-line treatment at United Kingdom National Health Service hospitals. Interventions At trial entry, patients were randomised (1 : 1) to a drug-free interval strategy or a conventional continuation strategy. After 24 weeks of treatment with sunitinib/pazopanib, drug-free interval strategy patients took up a treatment break until disease progression with additional breaks dependent on disease response and patient choice. Conventional continuation strategy patients continued on treatment. Both trial strategies continued until treatment intolerance, disease progression on treatment, withdrawal or death. Objective To determine if a drug-free interval strategy is non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of the co-primary outcomes of overall survival and quality-adjusted life-years. Co-primary outcomes For non-inferiority to be concluded, a margin of ≤ 7.5% in overall survival and ≤ 10% in quality-adjusted life-years was required in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This equated to the 95% confidence interval of the estimates being above 0.812 and -0.156, respectively. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated using the utility index of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire. Results Nine hundred and twenty patients were randomised (461 conventional continuation strategy vs. 459 drug-free interval strategy) from 13 January 2012 to 12 September 2017. Trial treatment and follow-up stopped on 31 December 2020. Four hundred and eighty-eight (53.0%) patients [240 (52.1%) vs. 248 (54.0%)] continued on trial post week 24. The median treatment-break length was 87 days. Nine hundred and nineteen patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (461 vs. 458) and 871 patients in the per-protocol analysis (453 vs. 418). For overall survival, non-inferiority was concluded in the intention-to-treat analysis but not in the per-protocol analysis [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) intention to treat 0.97 (0.83 to 1.12); per-protocol 0.94 (0.80 to 1.09) non-inferiority margin: 95% confidence interval ≥ 0.812, intention to treat: 0.83 > 0.812 non-inferior, per-protocol: 0.80 < 0.812 not non-inferior]. Therefore, a drug-free interval strategy was not concluded to be non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of overall survival. For quality-adjusted life-years, non-inferiority was concluded in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses [marginal effect (95% confidence interval) intention to treat -0.05 (-0.15 to 0.05); per-protocol 0.04 (-0.14 to 0.21) non-inferiority margin: 95% confidence interval ≥ -0.156]. Therefore, a drug-free interval strategy was concluded to be non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. Limitations The main limitation of the study is the fewer than expected overall survival events, resulting in lower power for the non-inferiority comparison. Future work Future studies should investigate treatment breaks with more contemporary treatments for renal cell carcinoma. Conclusions Non-inferiority was shown for the quality-adjusted life-year end point but not for overall survival as pre-defined. Nevertheless, despite not meeting the primary end point of non-inferiority as per protocol, the study suggested that a treatment-break strategy may not meaningfully reduce life expectancy, does not reduce quality of life and has economic benefits. Although the treating clinicians' perspectives were not formally collected, the fact that clinicians recruited a large number of patients over a long period suggests support for the study and provides clear evidence that a treatment-break strategy for patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy is feasible. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN06473203. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR award ref: 09/91/21) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 45. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona Collinson
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Kara-Louise Royle
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Jayne Swain
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Christy Ralph
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, St James's University Hospital, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Anthony Maraveyas
- Academic Oncology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hull York Medical School, Queens Centre Oncology and Haematology, Hull, UK
| | - Tim Eisen
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge and Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - Paul Nathan
- Department of Oncology, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, Hertfordshire, UK
| | - Robert Jones
- School of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK
| | - David Meads
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Tze Min Wah
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Adam Martin
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Janine Bestall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | | | - Jamie Oughton
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Kevin Chan
- Medical Oncology, Weston Park Cancer Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Elisavet Theodoulou
- Division of Clinical Medicine, University of Sheffield, Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Gustavo Arias-Pinilla
- Division of Clinical Medicine, University of Sheffield, Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Amy Kwan
- Academic Unit of Clinical Oncology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Luis Daverede
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Austral University Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Catherine Handforth
- Division of Clinical Medicine, University of Sheffield, Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Sebastian Trainor
- St James's Institute of Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Abdulazeez Salawu
- Academic Unit of Clinical Oncology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Vicky Goh
- School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - David Buckley
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Jenny Hewison
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Walter Gregory
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Peter Selby
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, St James's University Hospital, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Julia Brown
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Janet Brown
- Division of Clinical Medicine, University of Sheffield, Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wu M, Zhang JL. MR Perfusion Imaging for Kidney Disease. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2024; 32:161-170. [PMID: 38007278 DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2023.09.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2023]
Abstract
Renal perfusion reflects overall function of a kidney. As an important indicator of kidney diseases, renal perfusion can be noninvasively measured by multiple methods of MR imaging, such as dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging, intravoxel incoherent motion analysis, and arterial spin labeling method. In this article we introduce the principle of the methods, review their recent technical improvements, and then focus on summarizing recent applications of the methods in assessing various renal diseases. By this review, we demonstrate the capability and clinical potential of the imaging methods, with the hope of accelerating their adoption to clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mingyan Wu
- Central Research Institute, UIH Group, Shanghai, China; School of Biomedical Engineering Building, Room 409, 393 Huaxia Middle Road, Shanghai 201210, China
| | - Jeff L Zhang
- School of Biomedical Engineering, ShanghaiTech University, Room 409, School of Biomedical Engineering Building, 393 Huaxia Middle Road, Shanghai 201210, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Welsh SJ, Thompson N, Warren A, Priest AN, Barrett T, Ursprung S, Gallagher FA, Zaccagna F, Stewart GD, Fife KM, Matakidou A, Machin AJ, Qian W, Ingleson V, Mullin J, Riddick ACP, Armitage JN, Connolly S, Eisen TGQ. Dynamic biomarker and imaging changes from a phase II study of pre- and post-surgical sunitinib. BJU Int 2022; 130:244-253. [PMID: 34549873 DOI: 10.1111/bju.15600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore translational biological and imaging biomarkers for sunitinib treatment before and after debulking nephrectomy in the NeoSun (European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database [EudraCT] number: 2005-004502-82) single-centre, single-arm, single-agent, Phase II trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Treatment-naïve patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) received 50 mg once daily sunitinib for 12 days pre-surgically, then post-surgery on 4 week-on, 2 week-off, repeating 6-week cycles until disease progression in a single arm phase II trial. Structural and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnet resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and research blood sampling were performed at baseline and after 12 days. Computed tomography imaging was performed at baseline and post-surgery then every two cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors [RECIST]) excluding the resected kidney. Secondary endpoints included changes in DCE-MRI of the tumour following pre-surgery sunitinib, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response duration, surgical morbidity/mortality, and toxicity. Translational and imaging endpoints were exploratory. RESULTS A total of 14 patients received pre-surgery sunitinib, 71% (10/14) took the planned 12 doses. All underwent nephrectomy, and 13 recommenced sunitinib postoperatively. In all, 58.3% (seven of 12) of patients achieved partial or complete response (PR or CR) (95% confidence interval 27.7-84.8%). The median OS was 33.7 months and median PFS was 15.7 months. Amongst those achieving a PR or CR, the median response duration was 8.7 months. No unexpected surgical complications, sunitinib-related toxicities, or surgical delays occurred. Within the translational endpoints, pre-surgical sunitinib significantly increased necrosis, and reduced cluster of differentiation-31 (CD31), Ki67, circulating vascular endothelial growth factor-C (VEGF-C), and transfer constant (KTrans , measured using DCE-MRI; all P < 0.05). There was a trend for improved OS in patients with high baseline plasma VEGF-C expression (P = 0.02). Reduction in radiological tumour volume after pre-surgical sunitinib correlated with high percentage of solid tumour components at baseline (Spearman's coefficient ρ = 0.69, P = 0.02). Conversely, the percentage tumour volume reduction correlated with lower baseline percentage necrosis (coefficient = -0.51, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION Neoadjuvant studies such as the NeoSun can safely and effectively explore translational biological and imaging endpoints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah J Welsh
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nicola Thompson
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Anne Warren
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Pathology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Andrew N Priest
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Tristan Barrett
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Stephan Ursprung
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ferdia A Gallagher
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Fulvio Zaccagna
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Grant D Stewart
- Department of Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Kate M Fife
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Athena Matakidou
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK
| | - Andrea J Machin
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Wendi Qian
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Victoria Ingleson
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jean Mullin
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Antony C P Riddick
- Department of Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - James N Armitage
- Department of Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Stephen Connolly
- Department of Urology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, University College Dublin, Dublin 7, Ireland
| | - Timothy G Q Eisen
- Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre Urological Malignancies Programme, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Roche, Welwyn Garden City, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bhaduri S, Lesbats C, Sharkey J, Kelly CL, Mukherjee S, Taylor A, Delikatny EJ, Kim SG, Poptani H. Assessing Tumour Haemodynamic Heterogeneity and Response to Choline Kinase Inhibition Using Clustered Dynamic Contrast Enhanced MRI Parameters in Rodent Models of Glioblastoma. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14051223. [PMID: 35267531 PMCID: PMC8909848 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14051223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2021] [Revised: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 02/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
To investigate the utility of DCE-MRI derived pharmacokinetic parameters in evaluating tumour haemodynamic heterogeneity and treatment response in rodent models of glioblastoma, imaging was performed on intracranial F98 and GL261 glioblastoma bearing rodents. Clustering of the DCE-MRI-based parametric maps (using Tofts, extended Tofts, shutter speed, two-compartment, and the second generation shutter speed models) was performed using a hierarchical clustering algorithm, resulting in areas with poor fit (reflecting necrosis), low, medium, and high valued pixels representing parameters Ktrans, ve, Kep, vp, τi and Fp. There was a significant increase in the number of necrotic pixels with increasing tumour volume and a significant correlation between ve and tumour volume suggesting increased extracellular volume in larger tumours. In terms of therapeutic response in F98 rat GBMs, a sustained decrease in permeability and perfusion and a reduced cell density was observed during treatment with JAS239 based on Ktrans, Fp and ve as compared to control animals. No significant differences in these parameters were found for the GL261 tumour, indicating that this model may be less sensitive to JAS239 treatment regarding changes in vascular parameters. This study demonstrates that region-based clustered pharmacokinetic parameters derived from DCE-MRI may be useful in assessing tumour haemodynamic heterogeneity with the potential for assessing therapeutic response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sourav Bhaduri
- Centre for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK; (S.B.); (C.L.); (J.S.); (C.L.K.); (S.M.)
| | - Clémentine Lesbats
- Centre for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK; (S.B.); (C.L.); (J.S.); (C.L.K.); (S.M.)
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SM2 5NG, UK
| | - Jack Sharkey
- Centre for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK; (S.B.); (C.L.); (J.S.); (C.L.K.); (S.M.)
| | - Claire Louise Kelly
- Centre for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK; (S.B.); (C.L.); (J.S.); (C.L.K.); (S.M.)
| | - Soham Mukherjee
- Centre for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK; (S.B.); (C.L.); (J.S.); (C.L.K.); (S.M.)
| | - Arthur Taylor
- Department of Molecular Physiology & Cell Signalling, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK;
| | - Edward J. Delikatny
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA;
| | - Sungheon G. Kim
- Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY 10021, USA;
| | - Harish Poptani
- Centre for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK; (S.B.); (C.L.); (J.S.); (C.L.K.); (S.M.)
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|