Missing content? – Request curation!
Request curation for specific Genes, variants, or PubMed publications.
Have questions, comments or suggestions? - Let us know!
Email us at : firstname.lastname@example.org
|Ref Type||Journal Article|
|Authors||Cirkel GA, Hamberg P, Sleijfer S, Loosveld OJL, Dercksen MW, Los M, Polee MB, van den Berkmortel F, Aarts MJ, Beerepoot LV, Groenewegen G, Lolkema MP, Tascilar M, Portielje JEA, Peters FPJ, Klümpen HJ, van der Noort V, Haanen JBAG, Voest EE, null null|
|Title||Alternating Treatment With Pazopanib and Everolimus vs Continuous Pazopanib to Delay Disease Progression in Patients With Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Cancer: The ROPETAR Randomized Clinical Trial.|
|Date||2017 Apr 01|
|Abstract Text||To our knowledge, this is the first randomized clinical trial evaluating an alternating treatment regimen in an attempt to delay disease progression in clear cell renal cell carcinoma.To test our hypothesis that an 8-week rotating treatment schedule with pazopanib and everolimus delays disease progression, exhibits more favorable toxic effects, and improves quality of life when compared with continuous treatment with pazopanib.This was an open-label, randomized (1:1) study (ROPETAR trial). In total, 101 patients with treatment-naive progressive metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma were enrolled between September 2012 and April 2014 from 17 large peripheral or academic hospitals in The Netherlands and followed for at least one year.First-line treatment consisted of either an 8-week alternating treatment schedule of pazopanib 800 mg/d and everolimus 10 mg/d (rotating arm) or continuous pazopanib 800 mg/d (control arm) until progression. After progression, patients made a final rotation to either pazopanib or everolimus monotherapy (rotating arm) or initiated everolimus (control arm).The primary end point was survival until first progression or death. Secondary end points included time to second progression or death, toxic effects, and quality of life.A total of 52 patients were randomized to the rotating arm (median [range] age, 65 [44-87] years) and 49 patients to the control arm (median [range] age, 67 [38-82] years). Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk category was favorable in 26% of patients, intermediate in 58%, and poor in 15%. Baseline characteristics and risk categories were well balanced between arms. One-year PFS1 for rotating treatment was 45% (95% CI, 33-60) and 32% (95% CI, 21-49) for pazopanib (control). Median time until first progression or death for rotating treatment was 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.6-18.4) and 9.4 months (95% CI, 6.6-11.9) for pazopanib (control) (P = .37). Mucositis, anorexia, and dizziness were more prevalent in the rotating arm during first-line treatment. No difference in quality of life was observed.Rotating treatment did not result in prolonged progression-free-survival, fewer toxic effects, or improved quality of life. First-line treatment with a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor remains the optimal approach in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01408004.|
|Molecular Profile||Treatment Approach|
|Gene Name||Source||Synonyms||Protein Domains||Gene Description||Gene Role|
|Therapy Name||Drugs||Efficacy Evidence||Clinical Trials|
|Drug Name||Trade Name||Synonyms||Drug Classes||Drug Description|
|Gene||Variant||Impact||Protein Effect||Variant Description||Associated with drug Resistance|
|Molecular Profile||Indication/Tumor Type||Response Type||Therapy Name||Approval Status||Evidence Type||Efficacy Evidence||References|
|Unknown unknown||clear cell renal cell carcinoma||no benefit||Everolimus + Pazopanib||Phase II||Actionable||In a Phase II trial, alternating treatment with Votrient (pazopanib) and Afinitor (everolimus) did not improve 1-year progression free survival rate (45% vs 32%) or time to progression/death (7.4 vs 9.4 months) compared to continuous Votrient (pazopanib) treatment in patients with renal clear cell carcinoma (PMID: 27918762).||27918762|