↓ Skip to main content

Safety of pazopanib and sunitinib in treatment-naive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Asian versus non-Asian subgroup analysis of the COMPARZ trial

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hematology & Oncology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Safety of pazopanib and sunitinib in treatment-naive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Asian versus non-Asian subgroup analysis of the COMPARZ trial
Published in
Journal of Hematology & Oncology, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13045-018-0617-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Guo, Jie Jin, Mototsugu Oya, Hirotsugu Uemura, Shunji Takahashi, Katsunori Tatsugami, Sun Young Rha, Jae-Lyun Lee, Jinsoo Chung, Ho Yeong Lim, Hsi Chin Wu, Yen Hwa Chang, Arun Azad, Ian D. Davis, Marlene J. Carrasco-Alfonso, Bhupinder Nanua, Jackie Han, Qasim Ahmad, Robert Motzer

Abstract

The international, phase 3 COMPARZ study demonstrated that pazopanib and sunitinib have comparable efficacy as first-line therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, but that safety and quality-of-life profiles favor pazopanib. Our report analyzed pazopanib and sunitinib safety in Asian and non-Asian subpopulations. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive pazopanib 800 mg once daily (continuous dosing) or sunitinib 50 mg once daily in 6-week cycles (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). Safety population was composed of 363 Asian patients and 703 non-Asian patients. Asian patients had similar duration of exposure to either drug compared with non-Asian patients, although Asian patients had a higher frequency of dose modifications. Overall, hematologic toxicities, cytopenias, increased AST/ALT, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) were more prevalent in Asian patients, whereas gastrointestinal toxicities were more prevalent in non-Asian patients. Among Asian patients, hematologic adverse events and most non-hematologic AEs were more common in sunitinib-treated versus pazopanib-treated patients. Among Asian patients, the most common grade 3/4 AEs with pazopanib were hypertension (grade 3, 22%) and alanine aminotransferase increased (grade 3, 12%; grade 4, 1%); the most common grade 3/4 AEs with sunitinib were thrombocytopenia/platelet count decreased (grade 3, 36%; grade 4, 10%), neutropenia/neutrophil count decreased (grade 3, 24%; grade 4, 3%) hypertension (grade 3, 20%), and PPE (grade 3, 15%). A distinct pattern and severity of adverse events was observed in Asians when compared with non-Asians with both pazopanib and sunitinib. However, the two drugs were well tolerated in both subpopulations. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00720941 , Registered July 22, 2008 ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01147822 , Registered June 22, 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Other 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 33 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 35 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2019.
All research outputs
#4,132,640
of 23,072,295 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#314
of 1,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,026
of 330,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#9
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,072,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,199 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,080 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.