Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2004 Aug 1;101(3):533-40.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.20307.

Interferon-alpha-2a With or Without 13-cis Retinoic Acid in Patients With Progressive, Measurable Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Affiliations
Free article
Clinical Trial

Interferon-alpha-2a With or Without 13-cis Retinoic Acid in Patients With Progressive, Measurable Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Sophie D Fosså et al. Cancer. .
Free article

Abstract

Background: In patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC), interferon-alpha (IFN) monotherapy leads to response rates of 5-15%, dependent on the selection of patients. In 1995, preclinical and clinical data indicated an improvement of these results if IFN was combined with 13-cis retinoic acid (CRA).

Methods: In a randomized Phase II study, patients with measurable MRCC received either subcutaneous IFN (9 MU daily; Arm A) or the same daily subcutaneous dose of IFN plus oral CRA (1 mg/kg; Arm B). A central expert panel reviewed the X-ray documentation of objective responses.

Results: In the 50 eligible patients from Arm A, the objective, expert-reviewed response rate was 6% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.3-16.6%; 2 complete responses [CRs] and 1 partial response [PR]). A 19% response rate (95% CI, 9.4-32.0%) was stated for 53 eligible patients from Arm B (2 CRs and 8 PRs). Only one of the four CRs claimed by the clinical investigator was confirmed by the central review committee. Conversely, the expert committee deemed that 3 of 12 investigator-stated PRs were CRs. Constitutional toxicity (flu-like symptoms) and/or side effects from skin, mucosa, or eyes led to discontinuation of treatment in 22% of nonprogressing patients, more often in Arm B than in Arm A.

Conclusions: The results from this randomized Phase II study support expansion of the trial into a Phase III study to evaluate the effect of IFN-CRA combination therapy on the survival of patients who undergo nephrectomy prior to IFN-based immunotherapy. The considerable interobserver variability of response evaluation (individual investigator vs. expert panel) indicates the necessity of a central review of claimed responses in future Phase II studies involving patients with MRCC.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 6 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

MeSH terms

Feedback