Dataset Information

Association of cabozantinib pharmacokinetics, progression and toxicity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients: results from a pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cabozantinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with a substantial efficacy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and is associated with a challenging toxicity profile leading to frequent drug discontinuations. Whereas an exposure/safety relationship was demonstrated for this drug, an exposure/efficacy relationship is still unknown.

Patients and methods

We carried out a monocentric, observational, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) study in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (INDS MR 5612140520). We used measured blood concentrations of cabozantinib (C_meas) to determine the area under the curve (AUC), apparent clearance (Cl/F) and residual blood concentration (C_trough). Best overall response according to RECIST 1.1 and relevant toxicity (adverse event grade 3-4 or grade 2 requiring dose reduction or discontinuation) were assessed according to C_meas, C_trough, AUC and Cl/F.

Results

We enrolled 76 patients, including 35 who experienced disease progression and 30 with grade 3-4 toxicity. Patients with progressive disease had a significantly lower median C_trough (406 versus 634 ng/ml, P = 0.001), Cl/F (2 versus 2.9 l/h, P = 0.002) and AUC (16 versus 20 μg h/ml, P = 0.037) compared with patients who had disease control as best response. Patients with relevant toxicity had a significantly higher C_meas (732 versus 531 ng/ml, P = 0.006), C_trough (693 versus 521 ng/ml, P = 0.005) and AUC (21 versus 16 μg h/ml, P = 0.046) compared with patients who did not experience any grade relevant toxicity. Receiver operating characteristic curves obtained from our study defined a threshold for drug efficacy of 536.8 ng/ml and of 617.7 ng/ml for toxicity.

Conclusion

We first demonstrate the PK/PD relationship for cabozantinib. Severe toxicities are associated with a higher drug exposure, whereas inefficacy is associated with a lower drug exposure. Cabozantinib plasma drug monitoring may be useful to optimize clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Cerbone L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8645912 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) affects over 330,000 new patients every year, of whom 1/3 present with metastatic RCC (mRCC) at diagnosis. Most mRCC patients treated with a first-line agent relapse within 1 year and need second-line therapy. The present study aims to compare overall survival (OS) between nivolumab and cabozantinib from two recent pivotal studies comparing, respectively, each one of the two emerging treatments against everolimus in patients who relapse following first-line treatment. Comparison is traditionally carried out using the Bucher method, which assumes proportional hazard. Since OS curves intersected in one of the pivotal studies, models not assuming proportional hazards were also considered to refine the comparison. Four Bayesian parametric survival network meta-analysis models were implemented on overall survival (OS) data digitized from the Kaplan-Meier curves reported in the studies. Three models allowing hazard ratios (HR) to vary over time were assessed against a fixed-HR model. The Bucher method favored cabozantinib, with a fixed HR for OS vs. nivolumab of 1.09 (95% confidence interval: [0.77, 1.54]). However, all models with time-varying HR showed better fits than the fixed-HR model. The log-logistic model fitted the data best, exhibiting a HR for OS initially favoring cabozantinib, the trend inverting to favor nivolumab after month 5 (95% credible interval <1 from 10 months). The initial probability of cabozantinib conferring superior OS was 54%, falling to 41.5% by month 24. Numerical differences in study-adjusted OS estimates between the two treatments remained small. This study evidences that HR for OS of nivolumab vs. cabozantinib varies over time, favoring cabozantinib in the first months of treatment but nivolumab afterwards, a possible indication that patients with poor prognosis benefit more from cabozantinib in terms of survival, nivolumab benefiting patients with better prognosis. More evidence, including real-world observational data, is needed to compare effectiveness between cabozantinib and nivolumab.