ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2017
Real-world experience of everolimus as second-line treatment in metastatic renal cell cancer after failure of pazopanib.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survival Benefits of Second-line Axitinib Versus Everolimus After First Line Sunitinib Treatment in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2020Article
- Stomatitis And Everolimus: A Review Of Current Literature On 8,201 Patients.OncoTargets and therapy · 2019Article
- Administration of Nivolumab in Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer Following Treatment With mTOR Inhibitors.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimWe aimed to provide real-life data on the outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with everolimus as second-line treatment after failure of first-line pazopanib. PATIENTS AND
methodsData from the medical charts of mRCC patients from 8 centers in Greece and Spain were reviewed. All patients had received or were continuing to receive second-line everolimus treatment after failure of first-line treatment with pazopanib. No other previous therapies were allowed. The primary end point was the determination of progression-free survival (PFS).
resultsIn total, 31 patients were enrolled. Of these, 26% had performance status (PS) >0, 88% were of intermediate/poor Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk group, and only 61% had undergone prior nephrectomy. Median PFS was 3.48 months (95% CI: 2.37-5.06 months). Median overall survival (OS) from everolimus initiation was 8.9 months (95% CI: 6.47-13.14 months). Median OS from pazopanib initiation was 14.78 months (95% CI: 10.54-19.08 months). Furthermore, 32% of patients temporarily discontinued everolimus due to adverse events (AEs), and 22% of patients discontinued everolimus permanently due to toxicity. Most common toxicities were anemia (29%), stomatitis (26%), pneumonitis (19%), and fatigue (10%). Moreover, 14 AEs (27%) were graded as 3 or 4 and were reported by 13 patients (42%).
conclusionThis study provides data exclusively on the sequence pazopanib-everolimus in mRCC. Everolimus has a favorable safety profile and is active. The short PFS and OS could be attributed to the fact that the pazopanib-everolimus sequence was mainly offered to patients with adverse prognostic features, resulting in a modest increase in the combined OS of our population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.