Denosumab and zoledronic acid treatment in patients with genitourinary cancers and bone metastases.

Authors

null

Luis Costa

Hospital de Santa Maria and Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Lisbon, Portugal

Luis Costa , Karim Fizazi , Fred Saad , Janet Elizabeth Brown , Roger Von Moos , Stephane Oudard , Cora N. Sternberg , Vinod Ganju , Kurt Miller , Huei Wang , Tapan Maniar , Ada Braun

Organizations

Hospital de Santa Maria and Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Lisbon, Portugal, Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Sud, Villejuif, France, University of Montreal Hospital Center, CRCHUM, Montreal, QC, Canada, Cancer Research UK Clinical Centre, Leeds, United Kingdom, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France, San Camillo-Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy, Peninsula Oncology Centre, Frankston, Australia, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany, Amgen, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: Phase III trial results showed that denosumab is superior to zoledronic acid (ZA) in preventing skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with cancer and metastatic bone disease (Lipton et al; 2012, Eur J Cancer). Genitourinary (GU) cancers are some of the most commonly diagnosed cancers worldwide. We now compare the efficacy and safety of denosumab (DMAb) or ZA in a subgroup analysis of patients with GU cancers enrolled in the pivotal phase III trials. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive DMAb (120 mg, SC) or ZA (4 mg, IV, adjusted for renal function) every 4 weeks. Daily calcium and vitamin D supplements were strongly recommended. Time to 1st on-study SRE, using a Cox proportional hazards model, time to 1st and subsequent on-study SRE, using the Anderson-Gill model, and safety were evaluated for the GU subgroup in an ad hoc analysis. Results: 2,128 patients (1,052 DMAb; 1,076 ZA) had GU cancers (prostate = 1,901, renal = 155, bladder = 63, and transitional cell = 9). DMAb significantly delayed the time to 1st on-study SRE by 4.0 months compared with ZA (20.7 months vs 16.7 months) in patients with GU cancers (Table). DMAb also significantly delayed the time to 1st and subsequent on-study SRE. Time to disease progression and overall survival were similar between treatment groups. Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were reported by similar percentages of patients in both groups (AEs: 96.9% denosumab, 96.8% ZA; serious AEs: 62.8% denosumab, 60.2% ZA). 14.6% of DMAb pts and 15.9% of ZA pts had a renal AE. Hypocalcemia was reported for 12.9% of DMAb patients and 6.2% of ZA patients. There was no significant difference in the incidence of positively adjudicated osteonecrosis of the jaw between the DMAb (2.2%) and ZA (1.6%) groups (p=0.34). Conclusions: Among patients with GU cancers and metastatic bone disease, DMAb was superior to ZA in preventing SREs. Clinical trial information: NCT00330759 and NCT00321620.

Effect of DMAb vs ZA on SRE, disease progression, and survival in patients with GU cancers.
Endpoints Hazard ratio
(95% CI)
P value
Time to 1st on-study SRE 0.81
(0.71, 0.93)
0.004
Time to 1st and subsequent on-study SRE* 0.82
(0.72, 0.93)
0.002

* Multiple-event analysis; reported as a rate ratio.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Genitourinary (Prostate) Cancer

Track

Genitourinary Cancer

Sub Track

Prostate Cancer

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT00330759 and NCT00321620

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl; abstr 5079)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2013.31.15_suppl.5079

Abstract #

5079

Poster Bd #

40F

Abstract Disclosures