Patient-reported outcomes in a phase 2 study comparing atezolizumab alone or with bevacizumab vs sunitinib in previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma Journal Article


Authors: Pal, S. K.; McDermott, D. F.; Atkins, M. B.; Escudier, B.; Rini, B. I.; Motzer, R. J.; Fong, L.; Joseph, R. W.; Oudard, S.; Ravaud, A.; Bracarda, S.; Suárez, C.; Lam, E. T.; Choueiri, T. K.; Ding, B.; Quach, C.; Hashimoto, K.; Schiff, C.; Piault-Louis, E.; Powles, T.
Article Title: Patient-reported outcomes in a phase 2 study comparing atezolizumab alone or with bevacizumab vs sunitinib in previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma
Abstract: Objective: To evaluate patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from the IMmotion150 study. The phase 2 IMmotion150 study showed improved progression-free survival with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs sunitinib in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)+ tumours and suggested activity of atezolizumab monotherapy in previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Patients and methods: Patients with previously untreated mRCC were randomised to atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously (i.v.) every 3 weeks (n = 103), the atezolizumab regimen plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks (n = 101), or sunitinib 50 mg orally daily (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off; n = 101). The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) and Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) were administered on days 1 and 22 of each 6-week cycle. Time to deterioration (TTD), change from baseline in MDASI core and RCC symptom severity, interference with daily life, and BFI fatigue severity and interference scores were reported for all comers. The TTD was the first ≥2-point score increase over baseline. Absolute effect size ≥0.2 suggested a clinically important difference with checkpoint inhibitor therapy vs sunitinib. Results: Completion rates were >90% at baseline and ≥80% at most visits. Delayed TTD in core and RCC symptoms, symptom interference, fatigue, and fatigue-related interference was observed with atezolizumab (both alone and in combination) vs sunitinib. Improved TTD (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) was more pronounced with atezolizumab monotherapy: core symptoms, 0.39 (0.22–0.71); RCC symptoms, 0.22 (0.12–0.41); and symptom interference, 0.36 (0.22–0.58). Change from baseline by visit, evaluated by the MDASI, also showed a trend favouring atezolizumab monotherapy vs sunitinib. Small sample sizes may have limited the ability to draw definitive conclusions. Conclusion: PROs suggested that atezolizumab alone or with bevacizumab maintained daily function compared with sunitinib. Notably, symptoms were least severe with atezolizumab alone vs sunitinib (IMmotion150; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01984242). © 2020 The Authors BJU International © 2020 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Keywords: controlled study; treatment outcome; major clinical study; drowsiness; fatigue; bevacizumab; sunitinib; anorexia; quality of life; rash; disease severity; immunotherapy; scoring system; xerostomia; daily life activity; hazard ratio; patient-reported outcomes; kidney metastasis; sample size; effect size; patient-reported outcome; brief fatigue inventory; human; priority journal; article; functional status assessment; atezolizumab; disease severity assessment; md anderson symptom inventory; immotion150
Journal Title: BJU International
Volume: 126
Issue: 1
ISSN: 1464-4096
Publisher: Wiley Blackwell  
Date Published: 2020-07-01
Start Page: 73
End Page: 82
Language: English
DOI: 10.1111/bju.15058
PUBMED: 32233107
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC8415097
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- Export Date: 3 August 2020 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Robert Motzer
    1243 Motzer