← Back to The Absolute Effect
Renal Cell Carcinoma · Medical Oncology

CABOSUN

In previously untreated intermediate/poor-risk metastatic RCC, does cabozantinib improve PFS versus sunitinib?

Population
157 patients with untreated advanced clear-cell RCC and intermediate/poor IMDC risk.
Treatment
Cabozantinib 60 mg daily versus sunitinib 50 mg daily, 4 weeks on/2 weeks off.
Primary PFS
8.6 vs 5.3 months; HR 0.48 (95% CI 0.31–0.74), P=.0008.
Response / OS
ORR 20% vs 9%. Median OS 26.6 vs 21.2 months; HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.53–1.21).

Absolute Effect

A fixed-time PFS rate was not reported in the primary publication, so NNT is not calculated. The median difference (3.3 months) is descriptive and is not converted into NNT.

Subgroups: PFS results were consistent across IMDC risk and bone-metastasis strata; MET expression did not identify a clear predictive subgroup.

Safety: Grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in 68% vs 65%. The small phase II sample and open-label design limit precision for toxicity and OS.

Interpretation & limitations

CABOSUN is important as a randomized demonstration of activity of cabozantinib versus an older VEGFR-TKI comparator, but its small sample and phase II design make fixed-time absolute benefit estimation inappropriate.

Primary source

Choueiri TK, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:591–597; updated OS analysis.

Read the updated analysis →

Current-practice context · reviewed 14 October 2026

CABOSUN established cabozantinib as an active first-line VEGFR/MET-targeted option versus sunitinib in intermediate/poor-risk metastatic RCC. In contemporary practice, IO–TKI or dual-ICI regimens are often preferred when suitable; cabozantinib monotherapy remains relevant when immunotherapy is contraindicated, unavailable or unsuitable, and after prior agents according to the sequence.

CABOSUN primary/registry source ↗ · Current guideline guidance ↗