Michael Szarek, PhD, on the Rationale Behind Conducting a Q-TWiST Analysis of the Phase 3 TIVO-3 Study

Video

A Q-TWiST analysis evaluated the use of tivozanib versus sorafenib among patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma included in the phase 3 TIVO-3 study.

An analysis of tivozanib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) included in the phase 3 TIVO-3 study revealed that, as a third- or fourth-line treatment, tivozanib significantly increased quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease and toxicity (Q-TWiST) compared with sorafenib, primarily through an increase in TWiST.1

Overall, these results, presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2021 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium, suggestQ-TWiST may be considered an alternative patient-centered measure of benefit of tivozanib in these settings.

In an interview with CancerNetwork®, Michael Szarek, PhD, of the SUNY Downstate Medical Center, discussed the rationale behind conducting this analysis.

Transcription:

The TIVO-3 study was [for the] third- or fourth-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The primary results were published in Lancet Oncology in 2019,2 and the final overall survival results were presented at ASCO last year.3 And so, the study showed that tivozanib relative to sorafenib increased progression-free survival, with no apparent difference in overall survival. The authors in the Lancet Oncology paper also noted that there seemed to be better tolerability with tivozanib relative to sorafenib.

In this poster that was presented [at ASCO GU], we wanted to look at Q-TWiST, which is quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity, and it’s a way to basically take a patient's survival and quantify it, qualitatively and quantitatively. [Ultimately,] the study showed an increase in progression-free survival. The question is, was that also associated with a better quality of life essentially, so that was the basic motivation.

References:

1. Szarek M, Needle MN, Rini BI, et al. Q-TWiST analysis of tivozanib (T) versus sorafenib (S) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the TIVO-3 study. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(suppl 6):298. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2021.39.6_suppl.298

2. Rini BI, Pal SK, Escudier BJ, et al. Tivozanib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (TIVO-3): a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(1):95-104. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30735-1

3. Pal SK, Escudier B, Atkins MB, et al. TIVO-3: Final OS analysis of a phase III, randomized, controlled, multicenter, open-label study to compare tivozanib to sorafenib in subjects with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(suppl 15):5062. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.5062

Recent Videos
Data from the phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial at ASCO 2025 revealed a survival advantage with tarlatamab vs chemotherapy in second-line ES-SCLC.
The FDA approval of tarlatamab in SCLC has received much press attention, according to Daniel R. Carrizosa, MD, MS.
The National ICE-T Conference may inspire future collaboration between community and academic oncologists in the management of different cancers.
One of the largest obstacles to tackle in the kidney cancer landscape will be translating the research on rare kidney cancer subtypes into clinical trials.
Long-term toxicities like infections and secondary primary malignancies remain a concern when sequencing novel agents for those with multiple myeloma.
Zanzalitinib exhibited favorable data when evaluated alone or in combination with anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibition in phase 1 RCC trials.
The investigational agent exhibited superior efficacy vs pembrolizumab in patients with lung cancer, suggesting potential efficacy in kidney cancer.
Management of adverse effects and access to cellular therapies among community oncologists represented key points of discussion in multiple myeloma.
“As a community, if we’re looking to help enroll and advocate for patients with rare [kidney cancers], we need to be aware of what is out there,” said A. Ari Hakimi, MD.
Treatment with the dual inhibitor displayed a short half-life and a manageable toxicity profile in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma.
Related Content