Efficacy and toxicity of sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with severe renal impairment or on haemodialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To further investigate the effect of sunitinib, which is currently a standard of care for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), in patients with severe renal impairment or those undergoing dialysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical databases were used to identify all patients with mRCC treated with sunitinib in seven institutions internationally. Databases were searched to identify only those patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of < 30 mL/min/1.73 m² or those who had end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis. Baseline characteristics, adverse event data, response and progression-free survival were recorded. RESULTS: Nineteen patients met the inclusion criteria, 10 of whom were undergoing haemodialysis. Of the nine non-dialysis-dependent patients at drug initiation, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 27 mL/min/1.73 m² (range 23-29). Baseline characteristics included a median age of 61 years (range 44-77); 17 patients had a Karnofsky performance status of >80; eight patients had more than two metastatic sites and 17 had undergone prior nephrectomy. The estimated median progression-free survival of this cohort was 43 weeks (range 7 to 158+) and progression has not yet been reached in six patients. Partial response or stable disease was observed as best response in 15 patients. The most common treatment-related adverse events included fatigue, diarrhoea, hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR), nausea and vomiting and rash. Grade three treatment-related adverse events including fatigue (seven patients), HFSR (two patients), diarrhoea (one patient), rash (one patient) and stomatitis (one patient) occurred in a total of 12 patients. Only one patient experienced a grade four adverse event (HFSR). Only diarrhoea (P = 0.0002), HFSR (P < 0.0001) and neutropenia (P = 0.001) were more common in patients undergoing haemodialysis compared with non-dialysis-dependent patients. Four of the non-dialysis dependent patients started at a dose of 50 mg compared with three of the patients undergoing haemodialysis. However five and two of the patients undergoing haemodialysis started at doses of 37.5 mg and 25 mg daily, respectively, compared with four and one of the non-dialysis-dependent patients. All patients took sunitinib for 4 out of every 6 weeks. Dose reductions during treatment were performed in eight patients but only one patient required discontinuation of treatment. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease on haemodialysis can be safely treated with sunitinib at doses of 25-50 mg daily for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week break. The observed efficacy of therapy is similar to that reported in patients with normal renal function. These preliminary results warrant confirmation in a larger cohort of patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".