Background: Nanoparticle-drug conjugates enhance drug delivery to tumors. Gradual payload release inside cancer cells augments antitumor activity while reducing toxicity. CRLX101 is a novel nanoparticle-drug conjugate containing camptothecin, a potent inhibitor of topoisomerase I and the hypoxia-inducible factors 1α and 2α. In a phase Ib/2 trial, CRLX101+bevacizumab was well tolerated with encouraging activity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We conducted a randomized phase II trial comparing CRLX101+bevacizumab versus standard of care (SOC) in refractory mRCC. Patients and methods: Patients with mRCC and 2-3 prior lines of therapy were randomized 1: 1 to CRLX101+bevacizumab versus SOC, defined as investigator's choice of any approved regimen not previously received. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent radiological review in patients with clear cell mRCC. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate and safety. Results: In total, 111 patients were randomized and received ≥ 1 dose of drug (CRLX101+bevacizumab, 55; SOC, 56). Within the SOC arm, patients received single-agent bevacizumab (19), axitinib (18), everolimus (7), pazopanib (4), sorafenib (4), sunitinib (2), or temsirolimus (2). In the clear cell population, the median PFS on the CRLX101+bevacizumab and SOC arms was 3.7 months (95% confidence interval, 2.0-4.3) and 3.9 months (95% confidence interval 2.2-5.4), respectively (stratified log-rank P = 0 .831). The objective response rate by IRR was 5% with CRLX101+bevacizumab versus 14% with SOC (Mantel-Haenszel test, P = 0.836). Consistent with previous studies, the CRLX101+bevacizumab combination was generally well tolerated, and no new safety signal was identified. Conclusions: Despite promising efficacy data on the earlier phase Ib/2 trial of mRCC, this randomized trial did not demonstrate improvement in PFS for the CRLX101+bevacizumab combination when compared with approved agents in patients with heavily pretreated clear cell mRCC. Further development in this disease is not planned.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
MHV reports consulting/advisory role for Eisai, Exelixis, Novartis, Pfizer and has received research support from Roche/ Genentech and BMS. AH reports consulting/advisory role for Novartis and BMS. NV reports speaking engagements for BMS, Exelixis, and Roche/Genentech; consulting/advisory role for Norvartis, Pfizer, and Cerulean. JLL reports consulting/advisory role for AstraZeneca and Astellas and honoraria for AstraZeneca, Astellas, and Pfizer. UNV reports consulting/advisory role for Genentech, BMS, Exelixis, Novartis, Pfizer and has received research support from Novartis and BMS. SR reports consulting/ advisory role for Exelixis, Pfizer, Prometheus, and Sanofi and has received research funding from Novartis, BMS, Eisai, Genentech/ Roche, GSK, and Abbvie. AC reports consulting for BMS, Roche/ Genentech and speaker bureau for Merrimack. RJM reports consulting/advisory role for Pfizer, Novartis, Eisai, Exelixis and has received research support from BMS, Pfizer, Genentech/Roche, Eisai, Exelixis, and Novartis. NBH reports consulting/advisory role for Cerulean Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Exelixis. TH reports consulting/advisory role and has received research support for Pfizer, Novartis, Roche/Genentech, BMS, AVEO, Eisai, and Exelixis. The following authors are employees of Cerulean Pharmaceuticals: TC, JL, AS, and ES. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
This trial was supported by Cerulean Pharmaceuticals (no grant number applies).
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes