The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A randomised, double-blind phase II study evaluating cediranib vs cediranib and saracatinib in patients with relapsed metastatic clear cell renal cancer (COSAK)

A randomised, double-blind phase II study evaluating cediranib vs cediranib and saracatinib in patients with relapsed metastatic clear cell renal cancer (COSAK)
A randomised, double-blind phase II study evaluating cediranib vs cediranib and saracatinib in patients with relapsed metastatic clear cell renal cancer (COSAK)
BACKGROUND: Preclinical work suggests Src proteins have a role in the development of resistance to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeted therapy in metastatic clear cell renal cancer (mRCC). This hypothesis was tested in this trial using the SRC inhibitor saracatinib and the VEGF inhibitor cediranib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with disease progression after ?1 VEGF targeted therapy were eligible to participate in this double-blind, randomised (1:1) phase II study. The study compared the combination cediranib 30mg once daily (OD) and saracatinib 175mg OD (CS) (n=69) or cediranib 45mg OD and placebo OD (C) (n=69). Archived tissue was used for biomarker analysis (SRC, FAK, VHL, PTB1b and HIF2?: n=86).The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1.

RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2012, 138 patients were randomised across 16 UK sites. The characteristics of the two groups were well balanced. Partial responses were seen in 13.0% for C and 14.5% for CS respectively (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in PFS [5.4 months (3.6-7.3 months) for C and 3.9 (2.4-5.3 months) for CS; Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.18 (0.94-1.48)], or overall survival (OS) [14.2 months (11.2-16.8 months) for C and 10.0 (6.7-13.2 months) for CS; [HR 1.28 (1.00-1.63)]. There was no significant difference in the frequency of key adverse events, dose reductions or drug discontinuations. None of the biomarkers were prognostic for PFS or OS. Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) overexpression correlated with an OS benefit [HR 2.29 (1.09-4.82) p>0.05], but not PFS, for CS.

CONCLUSIONS: Saracatinib did not increase the efficacy of a VEGF targeted therapy (cediranib) in this setting. Biomarker analysis did not identify consistent predictive biomarkers.
renal cell carcinoma, tyrosine kinase inhibitor, biomarker, src, vegf
1569-8041
880-886
Powles, T.
0d3f760a-49dd-46f1-b94d-abb7d0b9ae6d
Brown, J.
64c8be68-e3cb-49ff-b5b0-525db5f4bcd0
Larkin, J.
cabe8316-202b-4e96-9cf1-2c6a40f2d3d1
Jones, R.
9d9f872b-9caa-442a-aef0-c6f14826ef55
Ralph, C.
ba7f7052-70de-4d9d-9e78-cda87d9f8689
Hawkins, R.
359a61bf-7393-4b1d-a1c1-cecc85ee8107
Chowdhury, S.
1b84a675-e808-4ca2-9418-85662361f713
Boleti, E.
0599bd36-7b3b-44ab-b570-c6343c1d9dd5
Bhal, A.
b6778695-4afa-4654-863d-5ce2b6c21352
Fife, K.
ba3e01c7-1bb4-4f96-954e-9b48e987bf5a
Webb, A.
dfbf7223-9771-4465-9770-2e535e9f11d0
Crabb, S.
bcd1b566-7677-4f81-8429-3ab0e85f8373
Geldart, T.
829fdbee-84dd-4825-b5eb-0e6e859ba9ff
Hill, R.
68ab3430-7172-432b-8280-15f46359aaf0
Dunlop, J.
b99b5ae7-1e62-4832-ba0a-66a424487d42
Hall, P.E.
be89f793-d3dc-493e-a528-a21916a46f26
McLaren, D.
7f5c3613-9f69-4e77-8bbb-9432690ebb79
Ackerman, C.
7dedb3d1-5cbf-4863-96e3-a1f5a5d0a53e
Beltran, L.
207f8cb8-d266-4b69-960c-e1fa1d5d724c
Nathan, P.
52aeacc6-c908-4819-b5c6-4ce2ed19032c
Powles, T.
0d3f760a-49dd-46f1-b94d-abb7d0b9ae6d
Brown, J.
64c8be68-e3cb-49ff-b5b0-525db5f4bcd0
Larkin, J.
cabe8316-202b-4e96-9cf1-2c6a40f2d3d1
Jones, R.
9d9f872b-9caa-442a-aef0-c6f14826ef55
Ralph, C.
ba7f7052-70de-4d9d-9e78-cda87d9f8689
Hawkins, R.
359a61bf-7393-4b1d-a1c1-cecc85ee8107
Chowdhury, S.
1b84a675-e808-4ca2-9418-85662361f713
Boleti, E.
0599bd36-7b3b-44ab-b570-c6343c1d9dd5
Bhal, A.
b6778695-4afa-4654-863d-5ce2b6c21352
Fife, K.
ba3e01c7-1bb4-4f96-954e-9b48e987bf5a
Webb, A.
dfbf7223-9771-4465-9770-2e535e9f11d0
Crabb, S.
bcd1b566-7677-4f81-8429-3ab0e85f8373
Geldart, T.
829fdbee-84dd-4825-b5eb-0e6e859ba9ff
Hill, R.
68ab3430-7172-432b-8280-15f46359aaf0
Dunlop, J.
b99b5ae7-1e62-4832-ba0a-66a424487d42
Hall, P.E.
be89f793-d3dc-493e-a528-a21916a46f26
McLaren, D.
7f5c3613-9f69-4e77-8bbb-9432690ebb79
Ackerman, C.
7dedb3d1-5cbf-4863-96e3-a1f5a5d0a53e
Beltran, L.
207f8cb8-d266-4b69-960c-e1fa1d5d724c
Nathan, P.
52aeacc6-c908-4819-b5c6-4ce2ed19032c

Powles, T., Brown, J., Larkin, J., Jones, R., Ralph, C., Hawkins, R., Chowdhury, S., Boleti, E., Bhal, A., Fife, K., Webb, A., Crabb, S., Geldart, T., Hill, R., Dunlop, J., Hall, P.E., McLaren, D., Ackerman, C., Beltran, L. and Nathan, P. (2016) A randomised, double-blind phase II study evaluating cediranib vs cediranib and saracatinib in patients with relapsed metastatic clear cell renal cancer (COSAK). Annals of Oncology, 27 (5), 880-886. (doi:10.1093/annonc/mdw014). (PMID:26802156)

Record type: Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Preclinical work suggests Src proteins have a role in the development of resistance to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeted therapy in metastatic clear cell renal cancer (mRCC). This hypothesis was tested in this trial using the SRC inhibitor saracatinib and the VEGF inhibitor cediranib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with disease progression after ?1 VEGF targeted therapy were eligible to participate in this double-blind, randomised (1:1) phase II study. The study compared the combination cediranib 30mg once daily (OD) and saracatinib 175mg OD (CS) (n=69) or cediranib 45mg OD and placebo OD (C) (n=69). Archived tissue was used for biomarker analysis (SRC, FAK, VHL, PTB1b and HIF2?: n=86).The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1.

RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2012, 138 patients were randomised across 16 UK sites. The characteristics of the two groups were well balanced. Partial responses were seen in 13.0% for C and 14.5% for CS respectively (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in PFS [5.4 months (3.6-7.3 months) for C and 3.9 (2.4-5.3 months) for CS; Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.18 (0.94-1.48)], or overall survival (OS) [14.2 months (11.2-16.8 months) for C and 10.0 (6.7-13.2 months) for CS; [HR 1.28 (1.00-1.63)]. There was no significant difference in the frequency of key adverse events, dose reductions or drug discontinuations. None of the biomarkers were prognostic for PFS or OS. Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) overexpression correlated with an OS benefit [HR 2.29 (1.09-4.82) p>0.05], but not PFS, for CS.

CONCLUSIONS: Saracatinib did not increase the efficacy of a VEGF targeted therapy (cediranib) in this setting. Biomarker analysis did not identify consistent predictive biomarkers.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 22 January 2016
Keywords: renal cell carcinoma, tyrosine kinase inhibitor, biomarker, src, vegf
Organisations: Cancer Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 386747
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/386747
ISSN: 1569-8041
PURE UUID: 644a20dd-c862-42dd-9735-7ba5c1b94ef0
ORCID for S. Crabb: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-3521-9064

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 03 Feb 2016 16:44
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:16

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: T. Powles
Author: J. Brown
Author: J. Larkin
Author: R. Jones
Author: C. Ralph
Author: R. Hawkins
Author: S. Chowdhury
Author: E. Boleti
Author: A. Bhal
Author: K. Fife
Author: A. Webb
Author: S. Crabb ORCID iD
Author: T. Geldart
Author: R. Hill
Author: J. Dunlop
Author: P.E. Hall
Author: D. McLaren
Author: C. Ackerman
Author: L. Beltran
Author: P. Nathan

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×