Patterns of Care and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma—Results From a Tertiary Cancer Center in India

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid



The presented study was undertaken to evaluate outcomes of mRCC patients in India as prior data is sparse. Data was extracted from a prospectively maintained Kidney Cancer Registry, which is a CTRI registered study. Median OS of 12.87 months is comparable to non trial outcomes from published literature. A high incidence of metabolic adverse events seen requires further evaluation.


The current treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) revolves around targeted agents, which have resulted in a median overall survival of 22 to 26 months in registration trials. However, the outcomes in a non-trial, real-world Indian population have not yet been evaluated.

Materials and Methods:

The present study was a part of a prospective Clinical Trials Registry–India-registered study, the Kidney Cancer Registry, a prospectively maintained kidney cancer registry. The data of patients with a diagnosis of mRCC from February 2007 to August 2015 who were potential candidates for systemic therapy were extracted from the database and analyzed for treatment patterns and outcomes.


The data from 212 patients were eligible for analysis. Of these 212 patients, 204 (96.2%) received first-line systemic treatment with sunitinib (40.6%), sorafenib (37.7%), pazopanib (2.8%), temsirolimus (2.8%), or everolimus (1.9%). The risk status of 91% of the patients could be stratified using the Heng criteria into favorable (18.9%), intermediate (43.9%), and poor risk (28.3%) categories. The response rate, clinical benefit rate, median progression-free survival, and median overall survival with first-line targeted therapy were 22.5%, 60.7%, 7.09 months, and 12.87 months, respectively. The common adverse events seen included skin rash (31.7%), hypertension (29.4%), grade 3 hand-foot syndrome (27.4%), mucositis (26.4%), dyslipidemia (20%), and hyperglycemia (17.6%). Patients receiving second-line therapy (22.6%) had superior overall survival to patients who had not (16.46 vs. 10.67 months; P = .032).


The present registry-based study is the first, to the best of our knowledge, of its type from India and showed that the overall outcomes in this real-world cohort appear comparable to non-trial data worldwide. An increased incidence of metabolic adverse events that require monitoring during treatment was also found.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles