Nonskeletal and skeletal effects of high doses versus low doses of vitamin D3 in renal transplant recipients: Results of the VITALE (VITamin D supplementation in renAL transplant recipients) study, a randomized clinical trial.

Vitamin D sufficiency is associated with a reduced risk of fractures, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular events, and cancers, which are frequent complications after renal transplantation. The VITALE (VITamin D supplementation in renAL transplant recipients) study is a multicenter double-blind randomized trial, including nondiabetic adult renal transplant recipients with serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25(OH) vitamin D) levels of <30 ng/mL, which is randomized 12 to 48 months after transplantation to receive high (100 000 IU) or low doses (12 000 IU) of cholecalciferol every 2 weeks for 2 months and then monthly for 22 months. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint, including diabetes mellitus, major cardiovascular events, cancer, and death. Of 536 inclusions (50.8 [13.7] years, 335 men), 269 and 267 inclusions were in the high-dose and low-dose groups, respectively. The serum 25(OH) vitamin D levels increased by 23 versus 6 ng/mL in the high-dose and low-dose groups, respectively (P < .0001). In the intent-to-treat analysis, 15% versus 16% of the patients in the high-dose and low-dose groups, respectively, experienced a first event of the composite endpoint (hazard ratio, 0.94 [0.60-1.48]; P = .78), whereas 1% and 4% of patients in the high-dose and low-dose groups, respectively, experienced an incident symptomatic fracture (odds ratio, 0.24 [0.07-0.86], P = .03). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the groups. After renal transplantation, high doses of cholecalciferol are safe but do not reduce extraskeletal complications (trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; identifier: NCT01431430).

Sunitinib Alone or After Nephrectomy for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Is There Still a Role for Cytoreductive Nephrectomy?

BACKGROUND: The CARMENA trial in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) demonstrated that treatment with sunitinib alone was noninferior to cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) followed by sunitinib (nephrectomy⬜sunitinib). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to provide updated overall survival (OS) outcomes of CARMENA and assess whether some subgroups may still benefit from upfront CN. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: CARMENA was a phase III trial in 450 patients with mRCC enrolled from 2009 to 2017. INTERVENTION: Patients in the intention-to-treat population received nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (standard of care [SOC]; n = 226) or sunitinib alone (n = 224). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary endpoint was OS, assessed using an updated data cut-off (October 2018; median OS event-free follow-up, 36.6 mo). Patients were reclassified by risk using International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Sunitinib alone was noninferior to nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.79⬜1.19; p = 0.8) and demonstrated longer median OS (19.8 mo vs 15.6 mo, respectively). For patients with two or more IMDC risk factors, OS was significantly longer with sunitinib alone than with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (31.2 mo vs 17.6 mo, respectively; HR, 0.65; p = 0.03). For patients with one IMDC risk factor, OS was longer for nephrectomy⬜sunitinib versus sunitinib alone although not significantly (31.4 mo vs 25.2 mo; HR, 1.30; p = 0.2). The post hoc nature of the subgroup analyses may limit their interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib alone was noninferior compared with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib, suggesting that CN should not be considered SOC in patients with mRCC requiring systemic treatment. Certain subgroups, including patients with one IMDC risk factor, may still benefit from upfront CN. PATIENT SUMMARY: We assessed the survival of patients with metastatic kidney cancer in a clinical trial. Patients treated with sunitinib on its own had the same survival as patients who had surgery before sunitinib treatment. We conclude that surgery may not be necessary for some patients with metastatic kidney cancer.

Sunitinib Alone or after Nephrectomy in Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive nephrectomy has been the standard of care in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma for 20 years, supported by randomized trials and large, retrospective studies. However, the efficacy of targeted therapies has challenged this standard. We assessed the role of nephrectomy in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma who were receiving targeted therapies. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with confirmed metastatic clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma at presentation who were suitable candidates for nephrectomy to undergo nephrectomy and then receive sunitinib (standard therapy) or to receive sunitinib alone. Randomization was stratified according to prognostic risk (intermediate or poor) in the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center prognostic model. Patients received sunitinib at a dose of 50 mg daily in cycles of 28 days on and 14 days off every 6 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 450 patients were enrolled from September 2009 to September 2017. At this planned interim analysis, the median follow-up was 50.9 months, with 326 deaths observed. The results in the sunitinib-alone group were noninferior to those in the nephrectomy-sunitinib group with regard to overall survival (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.71 to 1.10; upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for noninferiority, ≤1.20). The median overall survival was 18.4 months in the sunitinib-alone group and 13.9 months in the nephrectomy-sunitinib group. No significant differences in response rate or progression-free survival were observed. Adverse events were as anticipated in each group. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib alone was not inferior to nephrectomy followed by sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma who were classified as having intermediate-risk or poor-risk disease. (Funded by Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris and others; CARMENA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00930033 .).

VITamin D supplementation in renAL transplant recipients (VITALE): a prospective, multicentre, double-blind, randomized trial of vitamin D estimating the benefit and safety of vitamin D3 treatment at a dose of 100,000 UI compared with a dose of 12,000 UI in renal transplant recipients: study protocol for a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In addition to their effects on bone health, high doses of cholecalciferol may have beneficial non-classic effects including the reduction of incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. These pleiotropic effects have been documented in observational and experimental studies or in small intervention trials. Vitamin D insufficiency is a frequent finding in renal transplant recipients (RTRs), and this population is at risk of the previously cited complications. METHODS/DESIGN: The VITALE study is a prospective, multicentre, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial with two parallel groups that will include a total of 640 RTRs. RTRs with vitamin D insufficiency, defined as circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels of less than 30 ng/ml (or 75 nmol/l), will be randomized between 12 and 48 months after transplantation to blinded groups to receive vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) either at high or low dose (respectively, 100,000 UI or 12,000 UI every 2 weeks for 2 months then monthly for 22 months) with a follow-up of 2 years. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the benefit/risk ratio of high-dose versus low-dose cholecalciferol on a composite endpoint consisting of de novo diabetes mellitus; major cardiovascular events; de novo cancer; and patient death. Secondary endpoints will include blood pressure (BP) control; echocardiography findings; the incidences of infection and acute rejection episodes; renal allograft function using estimated glomerular filtration rate; proteinuria; graft survival; bone mineral density; the incidence of fractures; and biological relevant parameters of mineral metabolism. DISCUSSION: We previously reported that the intensive cholecalciferol treatment (100 000 IU every 2 weeks for 2 months) was safe in RTR. Using a pharmacokinetic approach, we showed that cholecalciferol 100,000 IU monthly should maintain serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D at above 30 ng/ml but below 80 ng/ml after renal transplantation. Taken together, these results are reassuring regarding the safety of the cholecalciferol doses that will be used in the VITALE study. Analysis of data collected during the VITALE study will demonstrate whether high or low-dose cholecalciferol is beneficial in RTRs with vitamin D insufficiency. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01431430.