1Edward Hines Jr VA Hospital, Hines, IL; 2Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; 3Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, IL; 4Lutheran General Hospital, Park Ridge, IL; 5University of Illinois at Chicago, IL, USA
Received 27 June 2001; revised 19 September 2001; accepted 23 October 2001.
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
A prospective multi-institutional phase II trial was undertaken to define the activity and toxicity of a unique decrescendo infusion of interleukin-2 (IL-2) in combination with interferon (IFN) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The identical regimen has shown promise in advanced melanoma.
Patients and methods
Between February 1997 and March 1999, 47 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, from five institutions, were treated with outpatient s.c. IFN (10 mU/m2/day) on days 15, followed by inpatient IL-2 via continuous i.v. decrescendo infusion [18 million International Units (MIU) (1 mg)/m2/6 h, followed by 18 MIU/m2/12 h, then 18 MIU/m2/24 h and 4.5 MIU/m2/24 h for the following 3 days] on days 812, in a hospital ward without intensive care unit (ICU)-type monitoring. Treatment was repeated every 4 weeks. In contrast to high dose IL-2 protocols, patient eligibility did not require pulmonary function tests and allowed serum creatinine up to 2 mg/dl.
Results
Among 44 eligible patients, 57% (25) had their primary in place, 57% (25) had bone or visceral involvement, and only 4% (2) had lung as their only site of disease. The overall response rate in 43 response-evaluable patients was 16.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.3 to 27.3], with three complete responses and four partial responses observed. The median survival was 13 months; nine patients remain alive at >23 months. The median duration of response is 36 months (range 11.5 to 48+ months). Toxicity was modest, consisting of typical cytokine-induced systemic symptoms and rare organ dysfunction. Severe grade 4 toxicity occurred in only 13% of the 130 cycles.
Conclusions
This unique, reasonably well tolerated IL-2/IFN combination induced a modest response rate with a number of durable remissions. While the optimal IL-2-based regimen for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma remains elusive, the present regimen should attract considerable interest. This is based on tumor activity very similar to high dose IL-2 in a patient population not as carefully selected for optimal organ function.
Key words: decrescendo IL-2, interferon, kidney cancer, phase II
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
High-dose bolus IL-2 has been shown to produce partial and complete responses in a minority of excellent-performance status metastatic RCC patients with pristine organ function [27]. As a single agent, doses of IL-2, as originally described by Rosenberg et al., ranging from 600 000 to 720 000 IU/kg every 8 h given as i.v. bolus therapy have consistently yielded overall response rates of 1727% [25]. A substantial number of these responses are complete, and durable remissions lasting beyond 5 years are well documented [2, 5, 8]. Unfortunately, high-dose IL-2 is associated with significant toxicity and, generally, only patients with an excellent performance status who lack cardiac or pulmonary disease can tolerate such therapy [9, 10]. The search for more tolerable regimens of IL-2 alone or in combination with other agents has therefore been undertaken.
Various treatment schedules of lower dose IL-2 have been, or are being tested [1113]. Although generally better tolerated, it remains to be proven whether comparable response rates using these lower dose schedules will produce durable remissions as described with high-dose bolus IL-2. On the basis of evidence of synergistic antitumor activity in pre-clinical models [1418], a number of clinical studies have been conducted combining a variety of doses and schedules of IL-2 with interferon-, the two most active cytokines in advanced RCC [1924]. Additional phase II and a phase III study of this combination with prolonged follow-up have yielded response rates similar to those observed with high-dose IL-2 [2528].
Alternative approaches to dose and schedule of these agents aimed toward reduction of toxicity of high-dose IL-2 may be important in improving the durability of responses and allow for less acute toxicity, which requires extensive expertise to manage. One such regimen developed by Keilholz and co-workers has been reported in the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma [29]. Keilholz et al. reported an overall response rate of 41%, with three of 27 patients achieving a complete response, using a novel decrescendo schedule of continuous infusion i.v. IL-2 in combination with a standard s.c. IFN dose. A key finding in this report was that toxicity was significantly reduced when compared with a sequential phase II trial at their institution using the same IFN dose and schedule combined with continuous infusion high-dose IL-2 [29]. The schedule and doses have also become the basis for nu-merous trials conducted by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and others in combination with chemotherapy for advanced melanoma. Given these promising data, we felt that this novel combination and schedule deserved investigation in the treatment of advanced RCC. The objectives of this study were to better characterize the antitumor efficacy of this regimen/schedule in terms of overall response rate and durability of these responses, and to further define toxicity.
![]() |
Patients and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Each patient was evaluated before initiation of treatment. A history and physical examination were obtained, as were appropriate laboratories and radiographic imaging of measurable or evaluable disease. Patients with a prior history suggestive of heart disease were required to undergo cardiac evaluation with an exercise treadmill stress test. This stress test was required to be negative for ischemia in order for patients to be eligible. Patients with a prior myocardial infarction were ineligible. Pulmonary function testing was not required.
Treatment plan
Recombinant human IFN-2b (intron-A) was reconstituted with saline immediately prior to s.c. injection. Recombinant human IL-2 (proleukin) was reconstituted in sterile water prior in preparation for i.v. infusion.
All patients were instructed on self-administration of IFN with the initial injection. IFN-2b was given as a single daily s.c. injection, usually in the afternoon or evening, at a dose of 10 000 000 U/m2 body surface area on days 15 of each 28-day cycle (Table 1). After 2 days off therapy, patients were admitted to the oncology inpatient floor to receive IL-2 by continuous decrescendo i.v. infusion. The IL-2 infusion began on day 8 of each cycle at a dose of 18 MIU (1 mg)/m2/6 h; the rate was then reduced in a stepwise fashion to 18 MIU/m2/12 h, then 18 MIU/m2/24 h, then 4.5 MIU/m2/24 h for three consecutive days. The total IL-2 dose to be administered was therefore 67.5 MIU/m2. Patients received appropriate supportive medications during IL-2 infusion in order to abrogate IL-2 toxicity. Corticosteroids were not to be administered during protocol treatment, unless life-threatening symptoms developed.
|
Patients were monitored daily during IL-2 infusion, and weekly during non-IL-2 treatment weeks with laboratory work including complete blood cell count with differential and serum chemistry analysis. Patients underwent history and physical examination every 4 weeks during therapy. All patients had reassessment of measurable/evaluable disease performed every 8 weeks until maximum response, and every 2 months thereafter until disease progression. All patients were to be followed until death.
Response assessment
Standard response criteria were used. Complete response (CR) was defined as the complete absence of all clinical evidence of malignant disease for at least two determinations, 4 weeks apart. Partial response (PR) required >50% decrease in the sum of the products of the perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions for at least two measurements, at least 4 weeks apart. Minor response (MR) was <50% but >25% reduction but was in fact considered stable disease. Stable disease was defined as including MR, no change, or <25% increase in disease and no new disease. Progressive disease was defined as >25% increase in the sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of all lesions, or the appearance of any new lesion. Response duration was measured from the date of PR or CR, and survival was measured from the date of entry into the study.
Statistical considerations
The primary objective of this multi-institutional Phase II study was to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of this unique IFN and IL-2 regimen/schedule in terms of response rate and durability of response. We also set out to characterize the clinical toxicity of this regimen and its feasibility in an inpatient non-intensive care setting. A two-stage design based on tumor response was used for patient accrual [30]. Given a minimum acceptable response rate of 15%, at least one response was required among the initial 19 evaluable patients (based on binomial distribution, P = 0.954). Assuming a minimum of one documented response, recruitment would continue to include a total of 4550 patients. If there were no responses among the first-stage sample, the study would be discontinued. Interim monitoring of the toxicity profile was also conducted. If >7 of the first 25 patients [28%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 10 to 46] enrolled experienced dose limiting toxicity, required transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) setting or had IL-2 stopped, the protocol was to be terminated permanently. It was felt then, that this regimen would be considered too toxic and not of significant benefit for standard therapy. The survival curve was estimated using the KaplanMeier method [31].
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
|
|
Toxicity
One half of this regimen, IFN, was administered as a s.c. injection on an outpatient basis, followed by IL-2 decrescendo continuous i.v. infusion, which was administered to patients in hospital on a standard medical ward. In general, this treatment was reasonably well tolerated. The total number of cycles received was 130, and the median number of cycles administered per patient was two. Four patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity. There were no treatment-related deaths. Severe grade 4 toxicity was uncommon, occurring in only 13% of cycles administered. Hypotension requiring vasopressor support and ICU monitoring during decrescendo IL-2 infusion was seen in only one patient. Standard cytokine-induced toxicities were observed; however, individually each was relatively infrequent (Table 4). Hematologic toxicity was most common, but overall, grade 3 to 4 toxicity occurred in only 16% of cycles received. Myelotoxicity was confined to neutropenia and anemia, and no grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia was observed. Typical constitutional symptoms were observed, but overall were relatively mild. Electrolyte abnormalities were uncommon; however, grade 3 or 4 hyponatremia did occur in 10% of cycles received and always during the decrescendo IL-2 portion of therapy. Seven episodes of grade 3, and one episode of grade 4 hyperglycemia were observed throughout the treatment courses, all of which occurred in patients with a history of diabetes mellitus and all of which responded promptly to oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin as required. Central nervous system, gastrointestinal and renal toxicity was rare.
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Table 5 summarizes a number of reports using IL-2-based treatment in the therapy of metastatic RCC. In February 2000, Fisher et al. updated long-term results on 255 patients with metastatic RCC who had received high-dose i.v. bolus recombinant IL-2 therapy [8]. Objective responses were observed in 15% of patients with 17 complete responses (7%) and 20 partial responses (8%). The median duration of response was 54 months, ranging from 3 to >131 months. The median survival was 16.3 months, with 1020% of patients estimated to be alive 5 to 10 years after treatment. It is well known that the IL-2 regimen employed is quite toxic and requires ICU type monitoring to be administered and most importantly requires very careful patient selection for optimal organ function. In an effort to evaluate the importance of IL-2 dose with regard to toxicity and efficacy in patients with metastatic RCC, Yang reported preliminary results of an ongoing prospective randomized phase III trial of three IL-2 regimens in this patient population [13]. Initially, a two-arm study comparing two bolus i.v. IL-2 regimens was undertaken (720 000 IU/kg compared with 72 000 IU/kg every 8 h for 15 consecutive doses). Later, a third arm of outpatient s.c. IL-2 was added (250 000 IU/kg/day for 5 days during week 1, then 125 000 IU/kg/day for 5 days per week over weeks 26). Not surprisingly, the lower doses of IL-2 produced significantly less toxicity. Response rates, however, appear to favor the high-dose approach. Survival data were not yet mature to allow for full comparison. Some investigators have suggested that perhaps the combination of IL-2 with IFN may be more efficacious than IL-2 alone. Atkins et al. observed no additional benefit when IFN was added to high-dose bolus IL-2 at 600 000 IU/kg every 8 h, up to 14 doses [4]. However, response rates have been comparable to high-dose bolus i.v. therapy for outpatient combinations of s.c. IL-2 plus IFN as reported by Dutcher for the Cytokine Working Group (CWG) [27] and Vogelzang in another multicenter trial [32]. Response duration, however, for these particular combinations, may be shorter, as reported [27]. We have shown ultra-low doses of combination IL-2 with IFN, on the other hand, to be clinically ineffective despite the advantageous toxicity profile [34]. In a randomized phase III trial, reported by the French, comparing continuous i.v. infusion IL-2 versus s.c. IFN versus both, results favored the combination in terms of response rate and event-free survival [28]. No significant difference in overall survival was observed, however. Lastly, the addition of cytotoxic chemotherapy such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) to combination IL-2 plus IFN was thought to be more active than combination immunotherapy alone [3537]. The CWG recently reported the results of a confirmatory phase II evaluation of IL-2, IFN and 5-FU in patients with metastatic RCC, which revealed only significant toxicity without attendant improvement in response rate when compared with other reports of IL-2 + IFN and 5-FU [33]. In a larger randomized trial, the French recently observed no benefit in response or survival when 5-FU was added to an outpatient combination of s.c. IL-2 with IFN; in fact neither regimen was terribly effective [37]. Current efforts within the CWG are therefore directed toward a phase III randomized comparison of high-dose i.v. bolus inpatient IL-2 treatment compared with outpatient s.c. injection of IL-2 + IFN. Preliminary results support a higher response rate for the inpatient high-dose IL-2 regimen [38].
|
Overall, the patients treated in this study would be considered an unfavorable population [39]. That is, 25 of 44 eligible patients had their primary tumor intact. More than half (23) had a performance status of 1; 25 (57%) had bone and/or visceral metastases, excluding the lung; and only two of the 44 patients had lung-only disease, traditionally considered a favorable prognostic feature. Recent data suggest that patients who undergo nephrectomy prior to receiving IFN have improved survival [40]. Nephrectomy was not performed prior to enrollment for a number of reasons, including: primary tumors were considered unresectable; patients were considered inappropriate candidates for nephrectomy; and nephrectomy in patients with documented metastatic disease was still considered somewhat controversial at the time this study was designed and run. The median time from prior nephrectomy, for those who had undergone resection of their primary tumors in this study, was 6 months. Others have reported a better long-term outcome in those patients who have undergone nephrectomy for >6 months from the time of development of metastases [41]. With these factors in mind, it would appear then that this particular sequential combination may in fact be more suitable for those patients not considered optimal candidates for high-dose bolus i.v. IL-2 (600 000720 000 IU/kg), and/or that it might rival that of high-dose IL-2 in the favorable population. Such an extrapolation could only be validated in a randomized phase III head-to-head comparison, however. Whether patient resources are best utilized with such a phase III trial is debatable.
This study helps to define another combination cytokine based approach to the treatment of advanced RCC with IL-2 and IFN. Although toxicity can be considered reasonable, the overall response rate remains suboptimal. That is, this combination can induce durable remissions, exceeding 3 years in some individuals, yet the vast majority of patients treated did not benefit. Much room for improvement remains in the treatment of this disease and we must therefore continue to seek new treatment approaches. This regimen may provide a base upon which to add new agents, especially those that attempt to overcome the tumor factors that are barriers to more effective immunotherapy (e.g. anti-VEGF, Flt3L, etc.)
![]() |
Acknowledgements |
---|
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
2. Rosenberg SA, Yang JC, Topalian SL et al. Treatment of 283 consecutive patients with metastatic melanoma or renal cell cancer using high dose bolus interleukin-2. JAMA 1994; 271: 907913.[Abstract]
3. Fisher RI, Coltman CA Jr, Doroshow JH et al. Metastatic renal cancer treated with interleukin-2 and lymphokine-activated killer cells. A phase II clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 1988; 108: 518523.[ISI][Medline]
4.
Atkins MB, Sparano J, Fisher RI et al. Randomized phase II trial of high-dose interleukin-2 either alone or in combination with interferon -2b in advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 661670.[Abstract]
5. Fyfe G, Fisher RI, Rosenberg SA et al. Results of treatment of 255 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received high-dose recombinant interleukin-2 therapy. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 688696.[Abstract]
6. West WH, Tauer KW, Yanelli JR et al. Constant infusion recombinant interleukin-2 in adoptive immunotherapy of advanced cancer. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 898905.[Abstract]
7. Bukowski RM, Goodman P, Crawford ED et al. Phase II trial of high-dose intermittent interleukin-2 in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a Southwest Oncology Group study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1990; 82: 143146.[Abstract]
8. Fisher RI, Rosenberg SA, Fyfe G. Long-term survival update for high-dose recombinant interleukin-2 in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Cancer J Sci Am 2000; 6 (Suppl 1): S55S57.[ISI][Medline]
9. Marincola FM. Interleukin-2. Biol Ther Cancer Updates 1994; 4: 116.
10. Margolin K, Rayner AA, Hawkins MJ et al. Interleukin-2 and lymphokine-activated killer cell therapy of solid tumors: analysis of toxicity and management guidelines. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 486498.[Abstract]
11. Sleijfer DT, Janssen RA, Buter J et al. Phase II study of subcutaneous interleukin-2 in unselected patients with advanced renal cell cancer on an outpatient basis. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 11191123.[Abstract]
12. Yang JC, Topalian SL, Parkinson D et al. Randomized comparison of high-dose and low-dose intravenous interleukin-2 for the therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an interim report. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 15721576.[Abstract]
13. Yang JC, Rosenberg SA. An ongoing prospective randomized comparison of interleukin-2 regimens for the treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer. Cancer J Sci Am 1997; 3 (Suppl 1): S79S84.[ISI][Medline]
14. Iigo M, Sakurai M, Tamura T et al. In vivo antitumor activity of multiple injections of recombinant interleukin 2, alone and in combination with three different types of recombinant interferon, on various syngeneic murine tumors. Cancer Res 1988; 48: 260264.[Abstract]
15.
Brunda MJ, Bellantoni D, Sulich V. In vivo anti-tumor activity of combinations of interferon and interleukin-2 in a murine model. Correlation of efficacy with the induction of cytotoxic cells resem-bling natural killer cells. Int J Cancer 1987; 40: 365371.[ISI][Medline]
16.
Kim B, Warnaka P. Indomethacin-enhanced immunotherapy of pulmonary metastases using IL-2 and IFN-. Surgery 1989; 106: 248255.[ISI][Medline]
17.
Cameron RB, McIntosh JK, Rosenberg SA. Synergistic antitumor effects of combination immunotherapy with recombinant interleukin-2 and a recombinant hybrid -interferon in the treatment of established murine hepatic metastases. Cancer Res 1988; 48: 58105817.[Abstract]
18. Weber JS, Rosenberg SA. Modulation of murine tumor major histocompatibility antigens by cytokines in vivo and in vitro. Cancer Res 1988; 48: 58185824.[Abstract]
19.
Rosenberg SA, Lotze MT, Yang JC et al. Combination therapy with interleukin-2 and -interferon for the treatment of patients with advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 18631874.[Abstract]
20.
Lee KH, Talpaz M, Rothberg JM et al. Concomitant administration of recombinant human interleukin-2 and recombinant interferon -2A in cancer patients: a phase I study. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 17261732.[Abstract]
21.
Sznol M, Mier JW, Sparano J et al. A phase I study of high-dose interleukin-2 in combination with interferon-2b. J Biol Response Mod 1990; 9: 529537.[ISI][Medline]
22.
Hirsh M, Lipton A, Harvey H et al. Phase I study of interleukin-2 and interferon -2a as outpatient therapy for patients with advanced malignancy. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 16571663.[Abstract]
23.
Ilson DH, Motzer RJ, Kradin RL et al. A phase II trial of interleukin-2 and interferon -2a in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 11241130.[Abstract]
24. Mittelman A, Puccio C, Ahmed T et al. A phase II trial of interleukin-2 by continuous infusion and interferon by intramuscular injection in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 1991; 68: 16991702.[ISI][Medline]
25.
Atzpodien J, Lopez Hanninen E, Kirchner H et al. Multi-institutional home-therapy trial of recombinant human interleukin-2 and interferon -2 in progressive metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 497501.[Abstract]
26.
Figlin RA, Belldegrun A, Moldawer N et al. Concomitant administration of recombinant human interleukin-2 and recombinant interferon -2a: an active outpatient regimen in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 414421.[Abstract]
27.
Dutcher JP, Fisher RI, Weiss G et al. Outpatient subcutaneous interleukin-2 and interferon- for metastatic renal cell cancer: five-year follow-up of the Cytokine Working Group Study. Cancer J Sci Am 1997; 3: 157162.[ISI][Medline]
28.
Negrier S, Escudier B, Lasset C et al. Recombinant human interleukin-2, recombinant human interferon -2a, or both in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. Groupe Francais dImmunotherapie. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 12721278.
29.
Keilholz U, Scheibenbogen C, Tilgen W et al. Interferon- and interleukin-2 in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Comparison of two phase II trials. Cancer 1993; 72: 607614.[ISI][Medline]
30. Gehan EA. The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chronic Dis 1961; 13: 346353.[ISI]
31. Kaplan FL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1958; 52: 457481.
32.
Vogelzang NJ, Lipton A, Figlin RA. Subcutaneous interleukin-2 plus interferon -2a in metastatic renal cancer: an outpatient multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 18091816.[Abstract]
33.
Dutcher JP, Logan T, Gordon M et al. Phase II trial of interleukin-2, interferon , and 5-fluorouracil in metastatic renal cell cancer: a cytokine working group study. Clin Cancer Res 2000; 6: 34423450.
34.
Clark JI, Gaynor ER, Martone B et al. Daily subcutaneous ultra- low-dose interleukin-2 with daily low-dose interferon- in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 1999; 5: 23742380.
35.
Atzpodien J, Kirchner H, Hanninen EL et al. Interleukin-2 in combination with interferon- and 5-fluorouracil for metastatic renal cell cancer. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29 (Suppl 5): 5658.
36. Lopez Hanninen E, Kirchner H, Atzpodien J. Interleukin-2 based home therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: risks and benefits in 215 consecutive single institution patients. J Urol 1996; 155: 1925.[ISI][Medline]
37.
Negrier S, Caty A, Lesimple T et al. Treatment of patients with metastatic renal carcinoma with a combination of subcutaneous interleukin-2 and interferon with or without fluorouracil. Groupe Francais dImmunotherapie, Federaion Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 40094015.
38. McDermott D, Flaherty L, Clark J et al. A randomized phase III trial of high-dose interleukin-2 (HD IL2) versus subcutaneous (sc) IL2/interferon (IFN) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001; 20: 172a (Abstr).
39.
Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Bacik J et al. Survival and prognostic stratification of 670 patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 25302540.
40.
Flanigan RC, Salmon S, Blumenstein BA et al. Nephrectomy followed by interferon -2b compared with interferon
-2b alone for metastatic renal-cell cancer. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 16551659.
41. Belldegrun A, Shvarts O, Figlin RA. Expanding the indications for surgery and adjuvant interleukin-2-based immunotherapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Cancer J Sci Am 2000; 6 (Suppl 1): S88S92.[ISI][Medline]