Dr. Cella Discusses Axitinib and Sorafenib Axis Trial

David Cella, PhD
Published: Friday, Jun 17, 2011

David Cella, PhD, a clinical research specialist and chair of the Department of Medical Social Science at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago discusses his findings as the lead investigator of the patient-reported outcomes phase III AXIS trial comparing axitinib to sorafenib as second-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Dr. Cella says researchers found that while on therapy, whether on axitinib or sorafenib, if a patient remained on therapy, their quality of life was very good and stays as good as it was at baseline, and possibly even improved a bit. There were no differences between the axitinib treated patients and the sorafenib treated patients in symptoms while on therapy. Due to the progression free survival difference in favor of axitinib, the sorafenib treated patients came off the quality of life study at a faster rate. Because of that, there were fewer sorafenib treated patients contributing information about the on therapy benefits of treatment.

When you look at the patients off therapy, remembering that sorafenib treated patients come off at a faster rate, you see that their quality of life gets worse. The study showed that off treatment quality of life is worse in all patients, whether treated by axitinib or sorafenib, than being on treatment. They also created a composite endpoint mixing progression with death and symptom decline.
David Cella, PhD, a clinical research specialist and chair of the Department of Medical Social Science at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago discusses his findings as the lead investigator of the patient-reported outcomes phase III AXIS trial comparing axitinib to sorafenib as second-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Dr. Cella says researchers found that while on therapy, whether on axitinib or sorafenib, if a patient remained on therapy, their quality of life was very good and stays as good as it was at baseline, and possibly even improved a bit. There were no differences between the axitinib treated patients and the sorafenib treated patients in symptoms while on therapy. Due to the progression free survival difference in favor of axitinib, the sorafenib treated patients came off the quality of life study at a faster rate. Because of that, there were fewer sorafenib treated patients contributing information about the on therapy benefits of treatment.

When you look at the patients off therapy, remembering that sorafenib treated patients come off at a faster rate, you see that their quality of life gets worse. The study showed that off treatment quality of life is worse in all patients, whether treated by axitinib or sorafenib, than being on treatment. They also created a composite endpoint mixing progression with death and symptom decline.

View Conference Coverage
Online CME Activities
TitleExpiration DateCME Credits
Clinical Interchange™: Translating Research to Inform Changing Paradigms: Assessment of Emerging Immuno-Oncology Strategies and Combinations across Lung, Head and Neck, and Bladder CancersOct 31, 20182.0
35th Annual Chemotherapy Foundation Symposium: Innovative Cancer Therapy for Tomorrow® Clinical Vignette SeriesJan 31, 20192.0
Publication Bottom Border
Border Publication
x