Adjusting for Subsequent Therapy Reveals Trend Toward OS Benefit With Lenvatinib Plus Everolimus in RCC

A post hoc analysis of the CLEAR trial shows that patients may derive an overall survival benefit with lenvatinib plus everolimus versus sunitinib for frontline treatment of RCC, with efficacy ongoing.

Analysis of lenvatinib (Lenvima) plus everolimus (Afinitor) versus sunitinib (Sutent) for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the CLEAR trial (NCT02811861) indicates that fewer patients required subsequent anticancer therapies with the combination regimen, according to data presented in a poster at the 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.

After adjusting for receipt of subsequent regimens for RCC, the hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) shifted below 1.0 and support the clinical benefit of therapy with lenvatinib plus everolimus in this population. These results are supported by prior data that show the combination led to a statistically significant benefit to progression-free survival (PFS) versus sunitinib (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53-0.80; P <.0001).

“These post hoc analyses of patients with advanced RCC who were treated in the first-line setting in CLEAR demonstrated that differences in subsequent anticancer medication affected the comparison of OS for the lenvatinib plus everolimus versus sunitinib arm,” Thomas Hutson, DO, PharmD, of the Urologic Cancer Research and Treatment Center at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas and professor of medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine, and colleagues wrote in their poster presentation.

A 2-stage estimation approach was used to adjust for effects of subsequent therapy on OS outcomes for lenvatinib/everolimus versus sunitinib, with a data cutoff of August 28, 2021. Median follow-up duration for each arm was 27 months and 26 months, respectively.

Duration of study treatment was shorted with sunitinib at 7.8 months versus 11.0 months with lenvatinib/everolimus. For those who did go on to receive other medications, duration from randomization to initiation of subsequent therapy was shorter with sunitinib versus the combination, at 6.62 months versus 8.03 months, respectively. For those whose next therapy was a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor, the median duration to initiation was 7.64 months with sunitinib and 9.69 months with lenvatinib/everolimus.

In the overall population, the Kaplan-Meier estimate for OS showed comparable efficacy of the 2 regimens (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.51-1.76). However, the investigators noted that more patients in the sunitinib arm (57.7%) had any subsequent therapy versus those treated with lenvatinib/everolimus (46.8%). After adjusting for the confounding effects of subsequent medication, the adjusted hazard ratio for OS was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.64-1.12) in favor of lenvatinib/everolimus. In both models, the median OS for either arm had not yet been reached.

The most commonly used medications in the second-line setting were PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (43.1% vs 35.3%), VEGF inhibitors (33.6% vs 28.0%), CTLA-4 inhibitors (5.0% vs 6.2%), and mTOR inhibitors (4.8% vs 0.8%). Looking at patients who received subsequent PD-1/L1 inhibitors alone, the hazard ratio for OS was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.68-1.19).

Despite a higher rate of treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAEs) resulting in death noted in the experimental arm (n = 355; 12.4%) versus the control (n = 340; 6.8%), the investigators contributed a majority of these to progressive disease (9.6% vs 6.2%). Overall, the toxicity profiles of each regimen were consistent with their known safety profiles.

Patient baseline characteristics of the 2 study arms were well balanced, with a few notable exceptions. Median age was 62 years (range, 32-89) for lenvatinib/everolimus and 61 years (range, 29-82) for sunitinib. More patients in the sunitinib (77.0%) than the lenvatinib/everolimus (72.8%) arm had prior nephrectomy. PD-L1 expression and risk stratification by MSKCC and International Metastatic RCC Database criteria were well balanced.

Treatment of patients on the CLEAR trial remain ongoing across the 3 study arms comparing the combinations of lenvatinib plus either everolimus or pembrolizumab versus control therapy with sunitinib. Results of the lenvatinib/pembrolizumab arm of the trial are being considered by the FDA as supporting evidence for the approval of the combination as frontline therapy of RCC.


Huston TE, Choueiri TK, Motzer RJ, et al. Post hoc analysis of the CLEAR study in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC): Effect of subsequent therapy on survival outcomes in the lenvatinib (LEN) + everolimus (EVE) versus sunitinib (SUN) treatment arm. J Clin Oncol. 2021;38(suppl 15):4562. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.4562

Related Videos
A recovery tracker and other digital tools may be useful in helping to manage patient symptoms following debulking surgery for gynecologic cancer, according to an expert from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
According to an expert from University Hospitals, integrative oncology has a place in the treatment of patients with kidney cancer alongside palliative care, psycho-oncology, and physical therapy.
Common symptoms following debulking surgery for gynecologic cancer appear to include pain, diarrhea, and nausea, according to an expert from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
According to an expert from University Hospitals, oncologists should work together and look for opportunities to improve patients’ diets and exercise routines to mitigate symptoms of kidney cancer and associated treatment.
According to an expert from University Hospitals, studying pathways related to inflammation, epigenetics, and the microbiome may elucidate how patients with kidney cancer respond to anti-cancer therapy.
Patients who use a recovery tracker tool appear to experience lower hospital readmission rates following gynecologic cancer debulking surgery compared with those who did not.
Medical oncologists and gynecologic oncologists alike have a shared responsibility to help treat symptoms of neuropathy in patients undergoing chemotherapy for gynecologic cancer, according to an expert from Duke University Medical Center.
Future research assessing cryocompression for those with gynecologic cancers will make use of different products to make the intervention easier and more accessible for patients.
An expert from University Hospitals touches on pain management guidelines that highlight moderate evidence in support of acupuncture, reflexology, and acupressure and massage as tools to manage general pain in patients with cancer.
Cryocompression demonstrates potential for preventing chemotherapy-induced neuropathy for those with gynecologic cancers, according to an expert from Duke University Medical Center.
Related Content