M

Mihai Hârza

Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Publishes on Renal cell carcinoma treatment, Ferroptosis and cancer prognosis, Renal Diseases and Glomerulopathies. 54 papers and 829 citations.

54Publications
829Total Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Tivozanib Versus Sorafenib As Initial Targeted Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results From a Phase III Trial
Robert J. Motzer, Dmitry Nosov, Timothy Eisen et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2013
Cited by 443Open Access

PURPOSE: Tivozanib is a potent and selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 (VEGFR1), -2, and -3. This phase III trial compared tivozanib with sorafenib as initial targeted therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic RCC, with a clear cell component, prior nephrectomy, measurable disease, and 0 or 1 prior therapies for metastatic RCC were randomly assigned to tivozanib or sorafenib. Prior VEGF-targeted therapy and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor were not permitted. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent review. RESULTS: A total of 517 patients were randomly assigned to tivozanib (n = 260) or sorafenib (n = 257). PFS was longer with tivozanib than with sorafenib in the overall population (median, 11.9 v 9.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.797; 95% CI, 0.639 to 0.993; P = .042). One hundred fifty-six patients (61%) who progressed on sorafenib crossed over to receive tivozanib. The final overall survival (OS) analysis showed a trend toward longer survival on the sorafenib arm than on the tivozanib arm (median, 29.3 v 28.8 months; HR, 1.245; 95% CI, 0.954 to 1.624; P = .105). Adverse events (AEs) more common with tivozanib than with sorafenib were hypertension (44% v 34%) and dysphonia (21% v 5%). AEs more common with sorafenib than with tivozanib were hand-foot skin reaction (54% v 14%) and diarrhea (33% v 23%). CONCLUSION: Tivozanib demonstrated improved PFS, but not OS, and a differentiated safety profile, compared with sorafenib, as initial targeted therapy for metastatic RCC.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study of Tasquinimod in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Cora N. Sternberg, Andrew J. Armstrong, Роберто Пили et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2016
Cited by 101Open Access

PURPOSE: Tasquinimod, a novel oral therapy targeting the tumor microenvironment, significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in a randomized, placebo-controlled phase II trial in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This phase III study was conducted to confirm the phase II results and to detect an overall survival (OS) benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC and evidence of bone metastases were assigned (2:1) to receive tasquinimod once per day or placebo until progression or toxicity. The primary end point was radiographic PFS (rPFS; time from random assignment to radiologic progression or death) per Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria and RECIST 1.1. The study had 99.9% power to detect an rPFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.6 with a two-sided alpha error of .05 and 80% power to detect a target HR of 0.8 for OS, the key secondary end point. RESULTS: In all, 1,245 patients were randomly assigned to either tasquinimod (n = 832) or placebo (n = 413) between March 2011 and December 2012 at 241 sites in 37 countries. Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups: median age, 71 years; Karnofsky performance status ≥ 90%, 77.3%; and visceral metastases, 21.1%. Estimated median rPFS by central review was 7.0 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 8.2 months) with tasquinimod and 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.5 to 5.5 months) with placebo (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.75; P < .001). Median OS was 21.3 months (95% CI, 19.5 to 23.0 months) with tasquinimod and 24.0 months (95% CI, 21.4 to 26.9 months) with placebo (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.28; P = .25). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were more frequent with tasquinimod (42.8% v 33.6%), the most common being anemia, fatigue, and cancer pain. CONCLUSION: In chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC, tasquinimod significantly improved rPFS compared with placebo. However, no OS benefit was observed.

Tivozanib versus sorafenib as initial targeted therapy for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: Results from a phase III randomized, open-label, multicenter trial.
Robert J. Motzer, Dmitry Nosov, Tim Eisen et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2012
Cited by 95

4501 Background: Tivozanib, a potent, selective, long half-life tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting all three VEGF receptors, showed activity and tolerability in a Phase II trial (JCO 2011;29[18S]:4550). Methods: Patients (pts) with clear cell advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), prior nephrectomy, RECIST-defined measurable disease, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1 were randomized 1:1 to tivozanib (T) 1.5 mg once daily for 3 weeks (wks) followed by 1 wk rest, or sorafenib (S) 400 mg twice daily continuously in a 4-wk cycle. Pts were treatment naïve or received no more than 1 prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease; pts receiving prior VEGF- or mTOR-targeted therapy were excluded. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded, independent radiological review. 500 pts were to be enrolled to observe 310 events, yielding 90% power to detect medians of 9.7 and 6.7 months (m) with 5% type I error (2-sided). Results: A total of 517 pts were randomized to T (n=260) or S (n=257). Demographics were well balanced between the 2 groups, except ECOG 0 (T: 45% vs S: 54%, p=0.035). Median PFS was 11.9 m for T vs 9.1 m for S (HR=0.797, 95% CI 0.639–0.993; p=0.042). In the treatment-naïve stratum (70% of pts enrolled in each arm), the median PFS was 12.7 m for T vs 9.1 m for S (HR 0.756, 95% CI 0.580–0.985; p=0.037). In all pts, objective response rate (ORR) for T was 33% vs 23% for S (p=0.014). The most common adverse event (AE; all grades/≥grade 3) for T was hypertension (T: 46%/26% vs S: 36%/18%) and for S was hand-foot syndrome (T: 13%/2% vs S: 54%/17%). Other important AEs included diarrhea (T: 22%/2% vs S: 32%/6%), fatigue (T: 18%/5% vs S: 16%/4%), and neutropenia (T: 10%/2% vs S: 9%/2%). Patient-reported outcome data are being analyzed. Overall survival data are not mature. Conclusions: Tivozanib demonstrated significant improvement in PFS and ORR compared with sorafenib as initial targeted treatment for advanced RCC. The safety profile of tivozanib is favorable, and includes a low incidence of fatigue, diarrhea, myelosuppression, and hand-foot syndrome.

A Randomized Phase II/III Study of Naptumomab Estafenatox + IFNα versus IFNα in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Final Analysis with Baseline Biomarker Subgroup and Trend Analysis
Robert E. Hawkins, Martin Gore, Yaroslav Shparyk et al.|Clinical Cancer Research|2016
Cited by 37

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine the efficacy of naptumomab estafenatox (Nap) + IFNα versus IFN in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase II/III study, 513 patients with RCC received Nap (15 μg/kg i. v. in three cycles of four once-daily injections) + IFN (9 MU s.c. three times weekly), or the same regimen of IFN monotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: This phase II/III study did not meet its primary endpoint. Median OS/PFS for Nap + IFN patients was 17.1/5.8 months versus 17.5/5.8 months for the patients receiving IFN alone (P = 0.56; HR, 1.08/P = 0.41; HR, 0.92). Post hoc exploratory subgroup and trend analysis revealed that the baseline plasma concentrations of anti-SEA/E-120 (anti-Nap antibodies) for drug exposure and IL6 for immune status could be used as predictive biomarkers. A subgroup of patients (SG; n = 130) having concentrations below median of anti-SEA/E-120 and IL6 benefitted greatly from the addition of Nap. In SG, median OS/PFS for the patients treated with Nap + IFN was 63.3/13.7 months versus 31.1/5.8 months for the patients receiving IFN alone (P = 0.02; HR, 0.59/P = 0.02; HR, 0.62). Addition of Nap to IFN showed predicted and transient immune related AEs and the treatment had an acceptable safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: The study did not meet its primary endpoint. Nap + IFN has an acceptable safety profile, and results from post hoc subgroup analyses showed that the treatment might improve OS/PFS in a baseline biomarker-defined RCC patient subgroup. The results warrant further studies with Nap in this subgroup. Clin Cancer Res; 22(13); 3172-81. ©2016 AACR.

Budesonide versus systemic corticosteroids in IgA Nephropathy
Cited by 30Open Access

Abstract IgA Nephropathy (IgAN) is characterized by mesangial deposition of dominant, polymeric, galactose-deficient IgA1 molecules of gut-associated lymphoid tissue origin. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of targeting the mucosal immune system dysregulation underlying IgAN pathogenesis with a pH-modified formulation of budesonide with a maximum release of active compound in the distal ileum and proximal colon. We did a retrospective study evaluating the efficacy of budesonide (Budenofalk) in the treatment of IgAN. From a retrospective cohort of 143 patients with IgAN followed in our department we identified 21 patients that received treatment with budesonide. These patients received budesonide at a dose of 9 mg/d in the first 12 months, followed by a dose reduction to 3 mg/d for the subsequent period. Only patients that received a 24-month treatment with budesonide were included in the analysis (n = 18). We matched the budesonide-treated cohort to 18 patients with IgAN treated with systemic steroids from the same retrospective cohort. Efficacy was measured as change in proteinuria, hematuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate over a 24-month period. Treatment with budesonide was associated with a 24-month renal function decline of -0.22 (95%CI, -8.2 to 7.8) ml/min/1.73m 2 , compared to -5.89 (95%CI, -12.2 to 0.4) ml/min/1.73m 2 in the corticosteroid treatment group (p = 0.44, for between group difference). The median reduction in proteinuria at 24-month was 45% (interquartile range [IQR]: -79%; -22%) in the budesonide group and 11% (IQR: -39%; 43%) in the corticosteroid group, respectively ( P = .009, for between group difference). The median reduction in hematuria at 24-month was 72% (IQR: -90%; -45%) in the budesonide group and 73% (IQR: -85%; 18%) in the corticosteroid group, respectively ( P = .22, for between group difference). Treatment with budesonide was well tolerated with minimal side effects. Budesonide (Budenofalk) was effective in the treatment of patients with IgAN at high-risk of progression in terms of reducing proteinuria, hematuria and preserving renal function over 24 months of therapy.