Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23598172›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2013

Axitinib versus sorafenib as second-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma: overall survival analysis and updated results from a randomised phase 3 trial.

Robert J Motzer, Bernard Escudier, Piotr Tomczak, Thomas E Hutson, M Dror Michaelson, Sylvie Negrier, Stephane Oudard, Martin E Gore, Jamal Tarazi, Subramanian Hariharan and 4 more

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 318 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
318citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00678392 phase3completednot on this map

Axitinib (ag-013736) as second line therapy for metastatic renal cell cancer: axis trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorPfizerRan2008 to 2016Enrolled723ConditionsKidney NeoplasmsArmsAxitinib (AG-013736), Sorafenib
NCT03379012 phase2completednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Phase 2 Randomized Study of Efficacy and Safety of Testosterone in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients With Fatigue

TypeinterventionalSponsorKidney Cancer Research BureauRan2016 to 2019Enrolled60ConditionsMetastatic Renal Cell CarcinomaArmsTestosterone undecanoate and sunitinib or pazopanib
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

318 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Kidney Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2022
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. LASER: A Phase 2 Trial ofJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

258 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Robert J MotzerMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: motzerr@mskcc.org.
Bernard Escudier
Piotr Tomczak
Thomas E Hutson
M Dror Michaelson
Sylvie Negrier
Stephane Oudard
Martin E Gore
Jamal Tarazi
Subramanian Hariharan
Connie Chen
Brad Rosbrook
Sinil Kim
Brian I Rini

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn a phase 3 trial comparing the efficacy and safety of axitinib versus sorafenib as second-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma, patients given axitinib had a longer progression-free survival (PFS). Here, we report overall survival and updated efficacy, quality of life, and safety results.

methodsEligible patients had clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma, progressive disease after one approved systemic treatment, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0-1. 723 patients were stratified by ECOG PS and previous treatment and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive axitinib (5 mg twice daily; n=361) or sorafenib (400 mg twice daily; n=362). The primary endpoint was PFS assessed by a masked, independent radiology review committee. We assessed patient-reported outcomes using validated questionnaires. Baseline characteristics and development of hypertension on treatment were studied as prognostic factors. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population, and safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This ongoing trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00678392.

findingsMedian overall survival was 20.1 months (95% CI 16.7-23.4) with axitinib and 19.2 months (17.5-22.3) with sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.969, 95% CI 0.800-1.174; one-sided p=0.3744). Median investigator-assessed PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI 6.7-9.2) with axitinib and 5·7 months (4.7-6.5) with sorafenib (HR 0.656, 95% CI 0.552-0.779; one-sided p<0.0001). Patient-reported outcomes scores were similar in the treatment groups at baseline, were maintained during treatment, but decreased at end-of-treatment. Common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (60 [17%]), diarrhoea (40 [11%]), and fatigue (37 [10%]) in 359 axitinib-treated patients and hand-foot syndrome (61 [17%]), hypertension (43 [12%]), and diarrhoea (27 [8%]) in 355 sorafenib-treated patients. In a post-hoc 12-week landmark analysis, median overall survival was longer in patients with a diastolic blood pressure of 90 mm Hg or greater than in those with a diastolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg: 20.7 months (95% CI 18.4-24.6) versus 12.9 months (10.1-20.4) in the axitinib group (p=0.0116), and 20.2 months (17.1-32.0) versus 14.8 months (12.0-17.7) in the sorafenib group (one-sided p=0.0020).

interpretationAlthough overall survival, a secondary endpoint for the study, did not differ between the two groups, investigator-assessed PFS remained longer in the axitinib group compared with the sorafenib group. These results establish axitinib as a second-line treatment option for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

fundingPfizer Inc.

Indexed as

AgedAntineoplastic AgentsAxitinibCarcinoma, Renal CellDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansImidazolesIndazolesIntention to Treat AnalysisKaplan-Meier EstimateKidney NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNiacinamideAntineoplastic AgentsAxitinibImidazolesIndazolesNiacinamidePhenylurea CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsSorafenib

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.