Everolimus (RAD001) is an orally administered inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), a therapeutic target for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. We did a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma whose disease had progressed on vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy.
Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma which had progressed on sunitinib, sorafenib, or both, were randomly assigned in a two to one ratio to receive everolimus 10 mg once daily (n=272) or placebo (n=138), in conjunction with best supportive care. Randomisation was done centrally via an interactive voice response system using a validated computer system, and was stratified by Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center prognostic score and previous anticancer therapy, with a permuted block size of six. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed via a blinded, independent central review. The study was designed to be terminated after 290 events of progression. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00410124.
All randomised patients were included in efficacy analyses. The results of the second interim analysis indicated a significant difference in efficacy between arms and the trial was thus halted early after 191 progression events had been observed (101 [37%] events in the everolimus group, 90 [65%] in the placebo group; hazard ratio 0.30, 95% CI 0.22-0.40, p<0.0001; median progression-free survival 4.0 [95% CI 3.7-5.5] vs 1.9 [1.8-1.9] months). Stomatitis (107 [40%] patients in the everolimus group vs 11 [8%] in the placebo group), rash (66 [25%] vs six [4%]), and fatigue (53 [20%] vs 22 [16%]) were the most commonly reported adverse events, but were mostly mild or moderate in severity. Pneumonitis (any grade) was detected in 22 (8%) patients in the everolimus group, of whom eight had pneumonitis of grade 3 severity.
Treatment with everolimus prolongs progression-free survival relative to placebo in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma that had progressed on other targeted therapies.
"Sunitinib , sorafenib , axitinib , pazopanib  and bevacizumab + interferon  have all been registered for the treatment of advanced RCC. Additionally, the mTOR inhibitors Temsirolimus and Everolimus have been registered for poor risk RCC patients  . Implementation of these new treatment modalities has lead to an impressive increase in progression-free survival . "
"Additionally, temsirolimus and everolimus, derivatives of rapamycin, are approved to treat advanced RCC . While significant tumor responses are seen in the setting of VEGFR inhibition they are much less common upon mTOR inhibition suggesting potential compensatory survival and proliferative mechanisms that can be co-targeted , . "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Rapamycin derivatives allosterically targeting mTOR are currently FDA approved to treat advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and catalytic inhibitors of mTOR/PI3K are now in clinical trials for treating various solid tumors. We sought to investigate the relative efficacy of allosteric versus catalytic mTOR inhibition, evaluate the crosstalk between the mTOR and MEK/ERK pathways, as well as the therapeutic potential of dual mTOR and MEK inhibition in RCC. Pharmacologic (rapamycin and BEZ235) and genetic manipulation of the mTOR pathway were evaluated by in vitro assays as monotherapy as well as in combination with MEK inhibition (GSK1120212). Catalytic mTOR inhibition with BEZ235 decreased proliferation and increased apoptosis better than allosteric mTOR inhibition with rapamycin. While mTOR inhibition upregulated MEK/ERK signaling, concurrent inhibition of both pathways had enhanced therapeutic efficacy. Finally, primary RCC tumors could be classified into subgroups [(I) MEK activated, (II) Dual MEK and mTOR activated, (III) Not activated, and (IV) mTOR activated] based on their relative activation of the PI3K/mTOR and MEK pathways. Patients with mTOR only activated tumors had the worst prognosis. In summary, dual targeting of the mTOR and MEK pathways in RCC can enhance therapeutic efficacy and primary RCC can be subclassified based on their relative levels of mTOR and MEK activation with potential therapeutic implications.
PLoS ONE 09/2014; 9(9):e104413. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0104413 · 3.23 Impact Factor
"Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are hypervascularized tumors with high metastatic potential. They are often resistant to conventional cytotoxic agents  . Therapies targeting angiogenesis have improved the prognosis of patients with metastatic RCC . "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Renal-cell carcinomas (RCC) are often resistant to conventional cytotoxic agents. Xenograft models are used for in vivo preclinical studies and drug development. The validity of these studies is highly dependent on the phenotypic and genotypic stability of the models. Here we assessed the stability of six aggressive human RCC xenografted in nude/NMRI mice. We compared the initial samples (P0), first (P1) and fifth (P5) passages for the following criteria: histopathology, immunohistochemistry for CK7, CD10, vimentin and p53, DNA allelic profiles using 10 microsatellites and CGH-array. Next we evaluated the response to sunitinib in primary RCC and corresponding xenografted RCC. We observed a good overall stability between primary RCC and corresponding xenografted RCC at P1 and P5 regarding histopathology and immunohistochemistry except for cytokeratin 7 (one case) and p53 (one case) expression. Out of 44 groups with fully available microsatellite data (at P0, P1 and P5), 66% (29 groups) showed no difference from P0 to P5 while 34% (15 groups) showed new or lost alleles. Using CGH-array, overall genomic alterations at P5 were not different from those of initial RCC. The xenografted RCC had identical response to sunitinib therapy compared to the initial human RCC from which they derive. These xenograft models of aggressive human RCC are clinically relevant, showing a good histological and molecular stability and are suitable for studies of basic biology and response to therapy.
International journal of clinical and experimental pathology 07/2014; 7(6):2950-62. · 1.89 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.