3 474

Cited 310 times in

Phase II Randomized Trial Comparing Sequential First-Line Everolimus and Second-Line Sunitinib Versus First-Line Sunitinib and Second-Line Everolimus in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author라선영-
dc.date.accessioned2015-01-06T17:38:50Z-
dc.date.available2015-01-06T17:38:50Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.issn0732-183X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/100368-
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: A multicenter, randomized phase II trial, RECORD-3, was conducted to compare first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression with the standard sequence of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: RECORD-3 used a crossover treatment design. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) noninferiority of first-line everolimus compared with first-line sunitinib. Secondary end points included combined PFS for each sequence, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Of 471 enrolled patients, 238 were randomly assigned to first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib, and 233 were randomly assigned to first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus. The primary end point was not met; the median PFS was 7.9 months for first-line everolimus and 10.7 months for first-line sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Among patients who discontinued first-line, 108 (45%) crossed over from everolimus to second-line sunitinib, and 99 (43%) crossed over from sunitinib to second-line everolimus. The median combined PFS was 21.1 months for sequential everolimus then sunitinib and was 25.8 months for sequential sunitinib then everolimus (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.7). The median OS was 22.4 months for sequential everolimus and then sunitinib and 32.0 months for sequential sunitinib and then everolimus (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.6). Common treatment-emergent adverse events during first-line everolimus or sunitinib were stomatitis (53% and 57%, respectively), fatigue (45% and 51%, respectively), and diarrhea (38% and 57%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Everolimus did not demonstrate noninferiority compared with sunitinib as a first-line therapy. The trial results support the standard treatment paradigm of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityopen-
dc.format.extent2765~2772-
dc.relation.isPartOfJOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/kr/-
dc.subject.MESHAdult-
dc.subject.MESHAged-
dc.subject.MESHAged, 80 and over-
dc.subject.MESHAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage*-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Renal Cell/drug therapy*-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology-
dc.subject.MESHCross-Over Studies-
dc.subject.MESHDisease-Free Survival-
dc.subject.MESHDrug Administration Schedule-
dc.subject.MESHEverolimus-
dc.subject.MESHFemale-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHIndoles/administration & dosage-
dc.subject.MESHKidney Neoplasms/drug therapy*-
dc.subject.MESHKidney Neoplasms/pathology-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHMiddle Aged-
dc.subject.MESHNeoplasm Metastasis-
dc.subject.MESHPyrroles/administration & dosage-
dc.subject.MESHSirolimus/administration & dosage-
dc.subject.MESHSirolimus/analogs & derivatives-
dc.subject.MESHTreatment Outcome-
dc.subject.MESHYoung Adult-
dc.titlePhase II Randomized Trial Comparing Sequential First-Line Everolimus and Second-Line Sunitinib Versus First-Line Sunitinib and Second-Line Everolimus in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Internal Medicine (내과학)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorRobert J. Motzer-
dc.contributor.googleauthorCarlos H. Barrios-
dc.contributor.googleauthorTae Min Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSilvia Falcon-
dc.contributor.googleauthorThomas Cosgriff-
dc.contributor.googleauthorW. Graydon Harker-
dc.contributor.googleauthorVichien Srimuninnimit-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKen Pittman-
dc.contributor.googleauthorRoberto Sabbatini-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSun Young Rha-
dc.contributor.googleauthorThomas W. Flaig-
dc.contributor.googleauthorRay Page-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSevil Bavbek-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJ. Thaddeus Beck-
dc.contributor.googleauthorPoulam Patel-
dc.contributor.googleauthorFoon-yiu Cheung-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSunil Yadav-
dc.contributor.googleauthorEdward M. Schiff-
dc.contributor.googleauthorXufang Wang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJulie Niolat-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDalila Sellami-
dc.contributor.googleauthorOezlem Anak-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJennifer J. Knox-
dc.identifier.doi10.1200/JCO.2013.54.6911-
dc.admin.authorfalse-
dc.admin.mappingfalse-
dc.contributor.localIdA01316-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ01331-
dc.identifier.eissn1527-7755-
dc.identifier.pmid25049330-
dc.identifier.urlhttp://jco.ascopubs.org/content/32/25/2765.long-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameRha, Sun Young-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorRha, Sun Young-
dc.rights.accessRightsfree-
dc.citation.volume32-
dc.citation.number25-
dc.citation.startPage2765-
dc.citation.endPage2772-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, Vol.32(25) : 2765-2772, 2014-
dc.identifier.rimsid49584-
dc.type.rimsART-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.