Cabozantinib Improves Survival in Renal Cell Carcinoma

Jason M. Broderick @jasoncology
Published: Wednesday, Jun 08, 2016

Toni Choueiri, MD

Toni Choueiri, MD

Cabozantinib (Cabometyx) reduced the risk of death by 34% compared with everolimus (Afinitor) in patients with previously treated advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), according to updated data from the phase III METEOR trial presented at the 2016 ASCO Annual meeting.1

The results, which were simultaneously published in The Lancet Oncology2 showed a 4.9-month median OS benefit with cabozantinib. The risk of disease progression was reduced by 49% with the multikinase inhibitor versus everolimus. Based on the METEOR trial, the FDA approved cabozantinib in April 2016 for patients with advanced RCC who had prior antiangiogenic therapy.

“In the phase III METEOR trial, treatment with cabozantinib was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival, as well as progression-free survival and objective response rate compared with everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Cabozantinib is a new standard for patients with advanced RCC after prior antiangiogenic therapy,” lead author Toni Choueiri, MD, clinical director, Lank Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, said when presenting the data at ASCO.

In the METEOR study, 658 patients with clear cell RCC were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive daily cabozantinib at 60 mg (n = 330) or everolimus at 10 mg (n = 328). The median age of patients was approximately 62 years (range, 31-86). By MSK criteria, approximately 46% of patients in each arm were in the favorable prognostic risk category, 41% were intermediate, and 13% were poor.

A majority of patients in each arm had received 1 prior VEGFR TKI (71%), with approximately 30% of patients having received ≥2 prior VEGFR TKIs. Use of prior VEGFR TKIs included sunitinib (64% in the cabozantinib arm vs 62% in the everolimus arm), pazopanib (44% vs 41%), axitinib (16% vs 17%), and sorafenib (6% vs 9%). The rates of prior cytokines, PD-1/PD-L1 agents, and bevacizumab between the cabozantinib and everolimus arms were similar as well, at 12% versus 16%, 5% versus 4%, and 2% versus 3%, respectively. Across the study, approximately 33% of patients had received radiotherapy and 86% of patients had undergone nephrectomy.

Median overall survival (OS) was 21.4 months (95% CI, 18.7 to not estimable) for patients receiving cabozantinib versus 16.5 months (95% CI, 14.7-18.8) for those receiving everolimus (HR, 0.66; 95% CI 0.53-0.83; P = .0003). The OS benefit with cabozantinib was sustained across all prespecified patient subgroups, including MSKCC risk groups, prior VEGFR TKIs, bone metastases, visceral bone metastases, and tumor MET status.

Commenting on the MET subgroup, Choueiri said, “The hazard ratio for overall survival in the MET-high versus MET-low expression group does suggest that patients do experience clinical benefit with cabozantinib regardless of MET expression level. This could reflect the broader target profile of cabozantinib.”

He also noted that there was a similar OS benefit between patients whose only prior VEGFR TKI was either sunitinib or pazopanib. The hazard ratio for OS was 0.66 for both subgroups.

Among patients with bone metastases, the median OS with cabozantinib was 20.1 months versus 12.1 months with everolimus (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.84). “We believe that these results due warrant further investigation into the underlying activity of cabozantinib in the bones.”

The updated median PFS by independent review was consistent with the initial PFS analysis at 7.4 months with cabozantinib compared with 3.9 months with everolimus (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41-0.62; P <.0001). Cabozantinib was superior to everolimus for PFS across all subgroups.

The median duration of treatment with cabozantinib was 8.3 versus 4.4 months with everolimus. The objective response rate (ORR) per independent review was 17% (95% CI, 13-22) in the cabozantinib arm versus 3% (95% CI, 2-6) in the everolimus arm. The stable disease rates were 65% versus 62% and the progressive rates were 12% versus 27%, respectively. The investigator-assessed ORR was 24% (95% CI, 19-29) with cabozantinib compared with 4% (95% CI, 2-7) with everolimus. Stables disease rates per investigator assessment were 63% in both arms and the progressive disease rates were 9% and 27%, respectively.

The updated safety results were consistent with those initially reported. The most common all-grade adverse events (AEs) with cabozantinib were diarrhea (75%), fatigue (59%), nausea (52%), decreased appetite (47%), PPES (43%), hypertension (37%), weight decrease (34%), and vomiting (34%). With everolimus, the most common all-grade AEs were fatigue (48%), anemia (39%), decreased appetite (35%), cough (34%), and dyspnea (30%).

The most common grade 3/4 AEs with cabozantinib were hypertension (15%), diarrhea (13%), and fatigue (11%), compared to anemia (17%), fatigue (7%), and hyperglycemia (5%) with everolimus.


View Conference Coverage
Online CME Activities
TitleExpiration DateCME Credits
Community Practice Connections™: Working Group to Optimize Outcomes in EGFR-mutated Lung Cancers: Evolving Concepts for Nurses to Facilitate and Improve Patient CareJun 30, 20181.5
Oncology Briefings™: Overcoming Chronic Iron Overload in Pediatric AML and MDSJun 30, 20181.0
Publication Bottom Border
Border Publication
x