Relative dose intensity (RDI) is a simple index for evaluation of the amount of drug administered per unit time. We retrospectively investigated the prognostic impact of RDI for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with second-line targeted therapy.
We enrolled 168 patients with mRCC. We assessed RDI at 4 weeks after second-line targeted therapy induction.
The median follow-up after second-line targeted therapy was 18.1 months. The median time-to-treatment-failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were 4.9 and 25.4 months, respectively. In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, the median OS of patients with second-line RDI < 0.7 was significantly shorter than those with RDI ≥ 0.7 (12.1 vs. 31.3 months; P = .030). In the subgroup analysis, second-line RDI was definitely prognostic in the poor-risk group of the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria, showing second-line RDI was an independent predictor for both TTF (hazard ratio [HR], 3.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-8.0; P = .002) and OS (HR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1-8.4; P = .026). Also, assessing the type of second-line regimen, the multivariate analysis showed that second-line RDI was an independent prognostic indicator of TTF (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.9; P = .040) and OS (HR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.7; P = .009) in patients treated with everolimus. In this group, the median TTF and OS of patients with RDI < 0.7 were 2.4 and 11.1 months, and those with RDI ≥ 0.7 were 5.3 and 25.9 months, respectively.
The results suggest that second-line RDI may be a prognostic predictor for patients with mRCC treated with second-line targeted therapy, particularly in both the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium poor-risk group and everolimus-treated group.
Clinical genitourinary cancer. 2016 Mar 24 [Epub ahead of print]
Suguru Shirotake, Yota Yasumizu, Keiichi Ito, Ayako Masunaga, Yujiro Ito, Yasumasa Miyazaki, Masayuki Hagiwara, Kent Kanao, Shuji Mikami, Ken Nakagawa, Tetsuo Momma, Takeshi Masuda, Tomohiko Asano, Masafumi Oyama, Nobuyuki Tanaka, Ryuichi Mizuno, Mototsugu Oya
Department of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan., Department of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan., Department of Urology, National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Japan., Department of Urology, National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Japan., Department of Urology, Saiseikai Central Hospital, Tokyo, Japan., Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan., Department of Urology, Ichikawa General Hospital, Tokyo Dental College, Ichikawa, Japan., Department of Urology, Aichi Medical University School of Medicine, Nagakute, Japan., Division of Diagnostic Pathology, Keio University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan., Department of Urology, Ichikawa General Hospital, Tokyo Dental College, Ichikawa, Japan., Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Saitama Hospital, Wako, Japan., Department of Urology, Saitama City Hospital, Saitama, Japan., Department of Urology, National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Japan., Department of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan., Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Urology, Saitama City Hospital, Saitama, Japan. Electronic address: ., Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: ., Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: .