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(The Christie NHS Foundation Trust), Martin Gore(Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust), Yaroslav Shparyk(Kyiv City Clinical Oncology Center), Vladimir Bondar(Donetsk National Technical University), Oleg Gladkov(Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Oncology Center), Tosho Ganev(University Hospital St. Marina), Mihai Hârza(Institutul Clinic Fundeni), Serhii Polenkov(Chernihiv Polytechnic National University), Igor Bondarenko(Alfred Nobel University), Petr Karlov(City Clinical Oncology Center), O. B. Karyakin(Medical Radiological Research Center), Р. Ш. Хасанов(Republican Oncological Clinical Dispensary), Gunnar Hedlund(Active Biotech (Sweden)), G. Forsberg(Active Biotech (Sweden)), Örjan Nordle(Active Biotech (Sweden)), Timothy Eisen(Addenbrooke's Hospital)
Clinical Cancer Research
February 5, 2016
Cited by 37

Abstract

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.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis