Advertisement

Does sunitinib have a patient-specific dose without diminishing its antitumor effect on advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms?

  • Satoshi Matsui
  • Atsushi KudoEmail author
  • Toshiro Ogura
  • Kosuke Ogawa
  • Hiroaki Ono
  • Yusuke Mitsunori
  • Daisuke Ban
  • Shinji Tanaka
  • Minoru Tanabe
Original Article – Clinical Oncology
  • 83 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Because it is unknown whether adjusting the dose of sunitinib can benefit patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (Pan-NENs), this retrospective study examined maximum tumor shrinkage rates and prognoses in patients with and without low doses of sunitinib administration.

Methods

Eighty-seven patients with metastatic and unresectable neoplasms, treated with sunitinib for > 1 month, were divided into a low-dose (LD) or high-dose (HD) group. The tumor response rates were investigated over time using computed tomography according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors criteria.

Results

The LD and HD groups included 42 and 45 patients, respectively. There were no differences in baseline characteristics (tumor size, Ki-67 index, mitosis, and differentiation) between the two groups. Progressive disease (PD), stable disease (SD), and partial response (PR) were observed in 16.7, 54.8, and 28.6% of patients in the LD group, respectively, and in 13.3, 60, and 26.7% of patients in the HD group, respectively. There were no differences in tumor shrinkage rates between the two groups (p = 0.87). The 3-year progression-free survival rates for the LD and HD groups were 2.4% and 2.3%, respectively (p = 0.67), and the 3-year overall survival rates were 57.9% and 70.5%, respectively (p = 0.76). The occurrence of adverse events was similar between the two groups (61.9% vs. 60.0%, p > 0.95).

Conclusions

Dose reduction of sunitinib did not alter tumor shrinkage rates or prognoses for patients with advanced Pan-NENs.

Keywords

Neuroendocrine tumor Sunitinib Low dose Liver metastasis Unresectable 

Notes

Acknowledgements

All pathological diagnoses were revised by Yuko Kinowaki at Department of human Pathology, Graduate school of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University.

Author contributions

Study concept and design: SM. Analysis and interpretation of data: SM, AK. Acquisition of data: SM, AK, TO, KO, HO, YM, DB. Drafting of the manuscript: SM, AK. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: ST. Statistical analysis: SM. Obtained funding: AK. Administrative, technical, or material support; AK. Study supervision: MT.

Funding

This work was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) Grant Number 19K09041.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abrams TJ, Lee LB, Murray LJ, Pryer NK, Cherrington JM (2003) SU11248 inhibits KIT and platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta in preclinical models of human small cell lung cancer. Mol Cancer Therap 2:471–478Google Scholar
  2. Boegemann M, Hubbe M, Thomaidou D, Blackburn S, Bent-Ennakhil N, Wood R, Bargo D (2018) Sunitinib treatment modification in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma: analysis of the STAR-TOR registry. Anticancer Res 38:6413–6422.  https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Casanovas O, Hicklin DJ, Bergers G, Hanahan D (2005) Drug resistance by evasion of antiangiogenic targeting of VEGF signaling in late-stage pancreatic islet tumors. Cancer Cell 8:299–309.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2005.09.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Faivre S et al (2017) Sunitinib in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: updated progression-free survival and final overall survival from a phase III randomized study. Ann Oncol 28:339–343.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw561 Google Scholar
  5. Fjallskog ML, Lejonklou MH, Oberg KE, Eriksson BK, Janson ET (2003) Expression of molecular targets for tyrosine kinase receptor antagonists in malignant endocrine pancreatic tumors. Clin Cancer Res 9:1469–1473Google Scholar
  6. Houk BE, Bello CL, Poland B, Rosen LS, Demetri GD, Motzer RJ (2010) Relationship between exposure to sunitinib and efficacy and tolerability endpoints in patients with cancer: results of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic meta-analysis. Cancer Chemotherap Pharmacol 66:357–371.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-009-1170-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ito T et al (2013) Phase II study of sunitinib in Japanese patients with unresectable or metastatic, well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Investig New Drugs 31:1265–1274.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10637-012-9910-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ito T et al (2015) Epidemiological trends of pancreatic and gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors in Japan: a nationwide survey analysis. J Gastroenterol 50:58–64.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-014-0934-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mendel DB et al (2003) In vivo antitumor activity of SU11248, a novel tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor and platelet-derived growth factor receptors: determination of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship. Clin Cancer Res 9:327–337Google Scholar
  10. Mizuno Y et al (2018) Sunitinib shrinks NET-G3 pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 144:1155–1163.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-018-2636-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Motzer RJ et al (2007) Sunitinib versus interferon alfa in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. New Engl J Med 356:115–124.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa065044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Motzer RJ et al (2013) Pazopanib versus sunitinib in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. New Engl J Med 369:722–731.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1303989 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Murray LJ et al (2003) SU11248 inhibits tumor growth and CSF-1R-dependent osteolysis in an experimental breast cancer bone metastasis model. Clin Exp Metastasis 20:757–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pape UF, Bohmig M, Berndt U, Tiling N, Wiedenmann B, Plockinger U (2004) Survival and clinical outcome of patients with neuroendocrine tumors of the gastroenteropancreatic tract in a german referral center. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1014:222–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pavel M et al (2016) ENETS consensus guidelines update for the management of distant metastatic disease of intestinal, pancreatic, bronchial neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) and NEN of unknown primary site. Neuroendocrinology 103:172–185.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000443167 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Raymond E et al (2011) Sunitinib malate for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. New Engl J Med 364:501–513.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1003825 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Vazquez S, Leon L, Fernandez O, Lazaro M, Grande E, Aparicio L (2012) Sunitinib: the first to arrive at first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Adv Therap 29:202–217.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-011-0099-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wang Y et al (2017) Sunitinib is effective and tolerable in Chinese patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a multicenter retrospective study in China. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 80:507–516.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-017-3367-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yao JC et al (2008) One hundred years after “carcinoid”: epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol 26:3063–3072.  https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.15.4377 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Yoo C et al (2017) Efficacy and safety of everolimus and sunitinib in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 79:139–146.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-016-3215-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Graduate School of MedicineTokyo Medical and Dental UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Molecular OncologyTokyo Medical and Dental UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations