|
|||||
|
|
||||||
© 2000 American Society for Clinical Oncology Phase III Trial of Interferon Alfa-2a With or Without 13-cis-Retinoic Acid for Patients With Advanced Renal Cell CarcinomaFrom the Genitourinary Oncology Service, Division of Solid Tumor Oncology, and the Departments of Medical Imaging and Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College of Cornell University; and New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY; Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; AMC Cancer Research Center, Denver, CO; and Evanston Northwestern Healthcare and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. Address reprint requests to Robert J. Motzer, MD, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021.
PURPOSE: A randomized phase III trial was conducted to determine whether combination therapy with 13-cis-retinoic acid (13-CRA) plus interferon alfa-2a (IFN 2a) is superior to IFN 2a alone in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred eighty-four patients were randomized to treatment with IFN
RESULTS: Complete or partial responses were achieved by 12% of patients treated with IFN
CONCLUSION: Response proportion and survival did not improve significantly with the addition of 13-CRA to IFN
METASTATIC RENAL CELL carcinoma (RCC) is characterized by a high level of resistance to systemic treatment.1-3 Cytotoxic chemotherapy and hormonal therapy are ineffective treatments for advanced RCC.4 Interest in biologic response modifiers has been fostered by a low rate of response to interferon alfa-2a (IFN 2a) and interleukin-2 therapy.5,6
13-cis-retinoic acid (13-CRA) increased the antiproliferative effects of IFN
The influence of cytokine treatment on quality of life (QOL) is an important aspect in the management of advanced RCC. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scale12 was used to assess QOL. Items were appended to the general questionnaire (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General [FACT-G]) to address the impact of side effects associated with treatment with IFN
Patient Selection Between April 1994 and July 1996, 284 patients were entered onto this randomized trial. Participating centers were Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and member institutions of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG). All patients gave informed consent. Eligibility requirements included the following: histologic confirmation of RCC, bidimensionally measurable disease, Karnofsky performance status (KPS) 70%, estimated life expectancy more than 3 months, WBC count 3,000/µL, platelet count 100,000/µL, serum total bilirubin level less than 1.5 mg/dL (normal, < 1.0 mg/dL), and serum creatinine level less than 2 mg/dL (normal, < 1.1 mg/dL) or creatinine clearance more than 50 mL/min. Patients were excluded if they had received prior systemic chemotherapy or immunotherapy, had received radiation within 4 weeks of study entry, or had brain metastases. Each patient was evaluated before initiation of treatment. A history was obtained and a physical examination, chest radiography, ECG, automated complete blood cell count, comprehensive blood chemistry panel including determination of cholesterol and triglyceride levels, and appropriate radiographic imaging of measurable disease were performed. A negative pregnancy test result was required for women with childbearing potential.
Treatment Plan
Patients were randomized to daily treatment with IFN
Treatment was continued until progression of disease, complete response, or development of toxicity occurred. Dose modifications during therapy were dictated by an attenuation schedule. The IFN Patients were monitored weekly for the first 4 weeks of therapy and every 2 weeks thereafter (physical examination, complete blood cell count, and serum chemical analysis). All patients underwent reassessment of measurable disease every 4 weeks until maximum response and every 2 months thereafter. All patients kept daily logs in which they documented symptoms and medications taken. Standard response and toxicity criteria were used.13 Stable disease was defined as disease that remained stable for at least 3 months from the day of evaluation after the first cycle of therapy.
Biostatistical Analysis
QOL Study The trial used FACT Version 3 as the tool for QOL assessment.12 For this trial, 17 disease- and treatment-specific items were developed and appended to the core questionnaire to address symptoms related to treatment with interferon and retinoids. The composite questionnaire was titled the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Biologic Response Modifier (FACT-BRM). Using an approach combining conceptual input and principal components factor analysis followed by checks on internal consistency, the original pool of 17 statements was reduced to a 16-item measure to assess toxicity related to treatment with biologic response modifiers. The 16-item measure consisted of two subscales to assess toxicity having a physical effect (10 items) and toxicity affecting mood or cognition (six items) (Table 1).
The Trial Outcome Index (TOI), calculated by adding the physical well-being score, functional well-being score, and the two biologic response modifier subscale scores, was used in the following analysis as a summary measure of physical and functional well-being. Time intervals around each scheduled assessment were defined so that each questionnaire received was included in an interval. The compliance rate for each interval was then calculated as the number of questionnaires received divided by the number expected. A joint mixed-effects and survival model that accounts for unignorable missing data was used to capture changes in QOL over time.18 Estimates of QOL at baseline and at 2, 8, 17 and 34 weeks were obtained for each arm, and differences between the arms were tested. No estimate of QOL at 52 weeks was obtained for the treatment arms, because there was a paucity of data from that assessment time.
MSKCC Prognostic Model
Patient Characteristics Two hundred eighty-four patients were registered onto the trial: 145 received IFN 2a alone and 139 received IFN 2a and 13-CRA. The two treatment arms were similar in terms of patient characteristics (Table 2). Overall median age was 60 years, and 61% of study patients had a KPS of 90%. One hundred seventy-eight patients (63%) had two or more metastatic sites, and 144 (51%) had undergone nephrectomy. Twenty-nine patients (20%) treated with IFN 2a both had undergone nephrectomy and had lung-only metastases, compared with 33 patients (24%) treated with IFN 2a plus 13-CRA. One hundred nine (38%) were registered by MSKCC and 175 (62%) by ECOG.
Response and Survival Twenty-five (9%) of the 284 patients registered onto the trial had a complete or partial response (Table 3). Complete or partial responses were achieved by 12% of patients treated with IFN 2a plus 13-CRA (five complete responses, 11 partial responses) and 6% of patients treated with IFN 2a (one complete response, eight partial responses; P = .14). Five patients (4%) treated with IFN 2a plus 13-CRA achieved a complete response, compared with one (1%) treated with IFN 2a alone (P = .11). Median duration of response (complete and partial combined) from the start of treatment in the group treated with the combination was 33 months (range, 9 to 50 months), versus 22 months (range, 5 to 38 months) for the group treated with IFN 2a alone (P = .03).
Thirty-seven patients remained progression-free after follow-up: 21 after treatment with IFN 2a plus 13-CRA and 16 after treatment with IFN 2a alone. The median progression-free survival time was 5 months, with no difference in progression-free survival between the two arms (P = .13; Fig 1). However, the progression-free survival curves started to separate after 1 year of follow-up. Nineteen percent of patients treated with IFN 2a plus 13-CRA were progression-free at 24 months, compared with 10% of patients treated with IFN 2a alone (P = .05).
Fifty-six of 284 patients remained alive, and the median survival time for all patients was 15 months (95% confidence interval, 12 to 17 months). The median follow-up for survivors was 38 months (range, 1 to 62 months); one of these patients was lost to follow-up at 1 month, another at 2 months. There was no difference in survival between the two treatment arms (P = .26; Fig 2).
Toxicity There was no difference in incidence of grade 2, 3, or 4 toxicities between treatment arms (Table 4). Grade 2 toxicities reported in 20% to 40% of patients were leukopenia, anemia, fever, and gastrointestinal toxicity. Grade 3 hematologic toxicities were reported in 60 patients (21%), and grade 4 hematologic toxicities were reported in three patients (1%). A total of 82 grade 3 and 10 grade 4 nonhematologic toxicities were reported in 284 patients.
QOL Analysis Two hundred thirty patients were asked to participate in the QOL assessment portion of the protocol. A total of 213 patients completed and returned at least one questionnaire; 735 questionnaires were received. The rate of compliance with baseline assessments was 81% in the IFN 2a treatment arm and 86% in the IFN 2a plus 13-CRA treatment arm (Table 5). Over time, compliance rates decreased; by the 52-week assessment, the rates were 24% and 39% in the IFN 2a and IFN 2a plus 13-CRA treatment arms, respectively. There were similar dropout rates in the two arms at each of the assessment times.
The estimates of change in TOI scores are displayed in Fig 3. There was a pattern of decrease in QOL from baseline to 2 weeks and a smaller decrease from 2 to 8 weeks, especially in the IFN 2a plus 13-CRA treatment arm, making the difference between the arms significant at 8 weeks (P = .02). After 8 weeks, there was some recovery of scores in the IFN 2a treatment arm and stabilization of scores in the IFN 2a plus 13-CRA treatment arm, with TOI scores significantly lower at 17 and 34 weeks in the IFN 2a plus 13-CRA treatment arm (P < .001 and P = .01, respectively). However, scores never recovered to baseline values in either arm.
TOI scores were compared according to risk group as classified by the MSKCC model.19 Each risk group had a dramatic decrease from baseline to 2 weeks, with the favorable- and intermediate-risk groups having a smaller decrease from 2 to 8 weeks (Fig 4). However, these two groups began to recover after 8 weeks, although a full recovery never occurred. In contrast, the poor-risk group experienced a decrease after 8 weeks, followed by a stabilization of scores at a very low level after 17 weeks. This group never experienced a recovery in scores, and although stabilization did occur after 17 weeks, it was at a level approximately 20 points lower than baseline. The differences between the intermediate- and poor-risk groups at 17 and 34 weeks were significant at the .05 level (P = .01 and P = .03, respectively).
Response proportion and survival did not improve significantly with the addition of 13-CRA to IFN 2a therapy in patients with advanced RCC. The response proportion for patients treated with IFN 2a plus 13-CRA was greater than that for patients treated with IFN 2a, with more complete responses in the combination therapy arm. Moreover, the duration of response for patients who achieved a complete or partial response was longer after treatment with IFN 2a plus 13-CRA than after treatment with IFN 2a alone. However, the overall response proportion for all patients treated on the trial was low (9%), with no significant difference in major response proportion (complete and partial combined) between arms. Two phase III trials are being conducted by others20,21 and may provide further insight into the role of retinoid-cytokine combination therapy against RCC.
Response proportions in individual phase II trials involving patients with advanced RCC range from 0% to 30% for single-agent IFN
Additional items were appended to the FACT-G scale12 in this study, to address the impact of biologic treatment on patients with advanced RCC. Patients treated with IFN
In a QOL study using the Rotterdam Symptom checklist, patients were randomized to treatment with IFN
We have reported on a risk classification undertaken in 670 patients with advanced RCC treated on clinical trials with cytotoxic therapy or cytokines.19 Patients treated on that trial who had poor-risk pretreatment features for survival had inferior QOL compared with patients with intermediate or favorable prognostic features. Patients with poor-risk features have a short survival regardless of whether they are treated with cytokine therapy or chemotherapy.19 Also, patients with intermediate- or favorable-risk features may be more likely to derive therapeutic benefit from cytokine therapy.32 In the current study, the poor-risk group of patients experienced the most symptoms associated with IFN
Two outcomes from this trial suggest that 13-CRA augmented response to IFN
This hypothesis is consistent with findings of our previous in vitro studies on renal cancer cell lines, in which 13-CRA enhanced the antiproliferative effect of IFN
In summary, response proportion and survival did not improve significantly with the addition of 13-CRA to IFN
Supported by grant no. CA 05826 from the National Cancer Institute and by Hoffman-La Roche, Nutley, NJ. We thank Patricia Fischer for providing nursing care and Carol Pearce for reviewing the manuscript.
1. Motzer RJ, Bander NH, Nanus DM: Renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 335:865875, 1996 2. Figlin RA: Renal cell carcinoma: Management of advanced disease. J Urol 161:381387, 1999[Medline] 3. Vogelzang NJ, Stadler WM: Kidney cancer. Lancet 352:16911696, 1998[Medline] 4. Motzer RJ, Vogelzang NJ: Chemotherapy for renal cell carcinoma, in Raghaven D, Scher HI, Leibel SA, et al (eds): Principles and Practice of Genitourinary Oncology, 1st ed. Philadelphia, PA,Lippincott-Raven, 1997, pp 885896 5. Wirth MP: Immunotherapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am 20:283295, 1993[Medline] 6. Bukowski R: Immunotherapy in renal cell carcinoma. Oncology 13:801813, 1999[Medline] 7. Hoffman AD, Engelstein D, Bogenrieder T, et al: Expression of retinoic acid receptor beta in human renal cell carcinomas correlates with sensitivity to the antiproliferative effects of 13-cis-retinoic acid. Clin Cancer Res 2:10771082, 1996[Abstract]
8.
Motzer RJ, Schwartz L, Law TM, et al: Interferon alfa-2a and 13-cis-retinoic acid in renal cell carcinoma: Antitumor activity in a phase II trial and interactions in vitro. J Clin Oncol 13:19501957, 1995
9.
Paule B, Bonhomme-Faivre L, Rudant E, et al: Interferon alfa-2a plus tretinoin in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A pilot study. Am J Health Syst Pharm 54:190192, 1997 10. Stadler WM, Kuzel T, Dumas M, et al: A multi-center phase II trial of interleukin-2, interferon-alpha, and 13-cis-retinoic acid in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 16:18201825, 1998[Abstract] 11. Atzpodien J, Buer J, Probst M, et al: Clinical and pre-clinical role of 13-cis-retinoic acid in renal cell carcinoma: Hannover experience. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 15:247, 1996 (abstr 625)
12.
Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, et al: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: Development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 11:570579, 1993 13. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, et al: Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 47:207214, 1981[Medline] 14. OBrien PC, Fleming TR: A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics 35:549556, 1979[Medline]
15.
Minasian LM, Motzer RJ, Gluck L, et al: Interferon alfa-2a in advanced renal cell carcinoma: Treatment results and survival in 159 patients with long-term follow-up. J Clin Oncol 11:13681375, 1993 16. Kaplan FL, Meier P: Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 52:457481, 1958 17. Hollander M, Wolfe DA: Nonparametric Statistical Methods. New York, NY,Wiley, 1973, pp 6874 18. Schlucter MD: Methods for the analysis of informatively censored longitudinal data. Stat Med 11:18611870, 1992[Medline]
19.
Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Bacik J, et al: Survival and prognostic stratification of 670 patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 17:25302540, 1999 20. Fossa SD, Mikisch GHJ, Mulder PM, et al: Interferon-alfa 2a with our without 13-cis-retinoid acid in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Toxicity analysis of an EORTC randomized trial. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 17:331a, 1998 (abstr 1276) 21. Atzpodien J, Kirchner H, Bergman L, et al: 13-cis-Retinoic acid, IFN-alpha, IL-2 and chemotherapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma: Results of a prospectively randomized trial of the German Cooperative Renal Carcinoma Immunotherapy Group. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18:448a, 1999 (abstr 1727)
22.
Vogelzang NJ, Lipton A, Figlin RA: Subcutaneous interleukin-2 plus interferon alfa-2a in metastatic renal cancer: An outpatient multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 11:18091816, 1993 23. Motzer RJ, Russo P: Systemic therapy for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 163:408417, 2000[Medline]
24.
Pyrhonen S, Salminen E, Ruutu M, et al: Prospective randomized trial of interferon alfa-2a plus vinblastine versus vinblastine alone in patients with advanced renal cell cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:28592867, 1999 25. Interferon-alpha and survival in metastatic renal carcinoma: Early results of a randomised controlled trial. Medical Research Council Renal Cancer Collaborators. Lancet 353:1417, 1999
26.
Fossa SD, Martinelli G, Otto U, et al: Recombinant interferon alfa-2a with or without vinblastine in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results of a European multi-center phase III study. Ann Oncol 3:301305, 1992 27. Neidhart JA, Anderson SA, Harris JE, et al: Vinblastine fails to improve response of renal cancer to interferon alfa-n1: High response rate in patients with pulmonary metastases. J Clin Oncol 9:832836, 1991[Abstract] 28. Negrier S, Escudier B, Lasset C, et al: Recombinant human interleukin-2, recombinant human interferon alfa-2a, or both in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 338:12731278, 1998
29.
Sagaster P, Micksche M, Flamm J, et al: Randomised study using IFN-alfa versus IFN-alfa plus coumarin and cimetidine for treatment of advanced renal cell cancer. Ann Oncol 6:9991003, 1995 30. De Mulder PH, Oosterhof G, Bouffioux C, et al: EORTC (30885) randomised phase III study with recombinant interferon alpha and recombinant interferon alpha and gamma in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: The EORTC Genitourinary Group. Br J Cancer 71:371375, 1995[Medline] 31. Figlin R, Thompson J, Roudet C, et al: Multi-center randomized placebo controlled phase II/III trial of CD8(+) tumor infiltrating lymphocyte therapy (CD8(+) TIL)/recombinant interleukin-2 in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 17:318a, 1998 (abstr 1225)
32.
Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Bacik J, et al: Effect of cytokine therapy on survival for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 18:19281935, 2000 33. Nanus DM, Guo M, Vasquez N, et al: Interferon alfa plus liposomal-encapsulated all-trans-retinoic acid (LipoAtra) for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 19:372a, 2000 (abstr 1473)
34.
Berg WJ, Nanus DM, Leung A, et al: Up-regulation of retinoic acid receptor beta expression in renal cancers in vivo correlates with response to 13-cis-retinoic acid and interferon-alfa-2a. Clin Cancer Res 5:16711675, 1999 Submitted January 31, 2000; accepted April 26, 2000. This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||