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

Abstract

Micro-Abstract

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.

Introduction:

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.

Results:

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).

Conclusion:

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