Axitinib versus sorafenib as second-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma: overall survival analysis and updated results from a randomised phase 3 trial
View abstract on PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.Axitinib demonstrated longer progression-free survival (PFS) than sorafenib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients. This study confirms axitinib as a valuable second-line treatment option for advanced kidney cancer.
Area Of Science
- Oncology
- Clinical Trials
- Pharmacology
Background
- Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is an advanced form of kidney cancer.
- Second-line treatment options for mRCC are crucial for improving patient outcomes.
- Axitinib and sorafenib are targeted therapies evaluated for mRCC treatment.
Purpose Of The Study
- To compare the efficacy and safety of axitinib versus sorafenib as second-line treatment for mRCC.
- To report overall survival (OS) and updated efficacy, quality of life, and safety results.
- To evaluate axitinib as a potential second-line treatment option for mRCC.
Main Methods
- A phase 3, randomized trial involving 723 patients with mRCC.
- Patients received either axitinib (5 mg twice daily) or sorafenib (400 mg twice daily).
- Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and patient-reported outcomes.
Main Results
- Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with axitinib (8.3 months) compared to sorafenib (5.7 months).
- Overall survival did not significantly differ between the axitinib and sorafenib groups (20.1 vs. 19.2 months).
- Common grade 3 or higher adverse events included hypertension and diarrhea for both treatments.
Conclusions
- Investigator-assessed PFS was superior with axitinib compared to sorafenib.
- Axitinib is established as a viable second-line treatment option for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
- While OS did not differ, the improved PFS supports axitinib's role in mRCC management.