[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background: The Prostate Cancer Registry is the first international, prospective, observational study documenting the characteristics and management of patients with mCRPC in routine clinical practice, independent of treatment prescribed. The registry aims to provide real-world insights into how different therapies are used in routine practice, including those that have recently become available.
Materials and Methods: The registry aims to enrol 3000 mCRPC patients and to follow them for a maximum of 3 years. As of April 2015, 2051 patients with mCRPC from >150 centres across 16 countries have enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Registry (NCT02236637). Patients are enrolled upon initiating a mCRPC treatment or in a period of surveillance, defined as not currently receiving an active treatment for castration resistance; androgen deprivation and bone-sparing treatments can continue. At enrolment, information on disease history is collected, followed by prospective data capture of patient characteristics, clinical status, disease management, quality of life, medical resource utilisation and outcomes, including survival.
Results: We report data of 505 patients enrolled between June 2013 and January 2014 and followed for up to 9 months. The mean age was 71.5 years with a mean time since diagnosis of 5.7 years. Historical data at diagnosis indicate that 60% of patients had a Gleason score ≥8 and that 46% were metastatic. In addition, 22% of patients had undergone radical prostatectomy and 33% had received radiotherapy to the prostate. Metastatic lesions were observed in the bone (79%), lung (9%) and liver (6%). Most patients (63%) had ≥1 comorbidity (55% cardiovascular disease; 13% diabetes) and 79% had received ≥1 concomitant therapy (48% analgesics; 45% antihypertensives). Of 505 patients, 296 were chemotherapy-naïve at study entry and 209 had received prior chemotherapy.
At enrolment, 58% of patients initiated mCRPC treatment. By the 9-month follow-up period, 383 of 505 patients (76%) had started a new mCRPC treatment(s) with first treatments in the study being abiraterone (n=171; 45%), enzalutamide (n=46; 12%), docetaxel (n=117; 31%), and cabazitaxel (n=44; 12%).
Within the 9-month follow-up period, of those patients starting a new mCRPC treatment 287 of 383 patients (75%) received one line of therapy.
Conclusions: These first results provide detailed information on patient characteristics, disease status and treatment in mCRPC patients outside randomised clinical trials in a variety of clinical settings, across a number of countries. These data represent valuable insights into clinical practice. As these data mature, we expect to further enhance our understanding of treatment patterns in mCRPC, with the aim of improving outcomes for patients.
European Cancer Conference, Vienna, Austria; 09/2015
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background Cabozantinib is an oral, small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) as well as MET and AXL, each of which has been implicated in the pathobiology of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma or in the development of resistance to antiangiogenic drugs. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib, as compared with everolimus, in patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. Methods We randomly assigned 658 patients to receive cabozantinib at a dose of 60 mg daily or everolimus at a dose of 10 mg daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary efficacy end points were overall survival and objective response rate. Results Median progression-free survival was 7.4 months with cabozantinib and 3.8 months with everolimus. The rate of progression or death was 42% lower with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.75; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 21% with cabozantinib and 5% with everolimus (P<0.001). A planned interim analysis showed that overall survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89; P=0.005) but did not cross the significance boundary for the interim analysis. Adverse events were managed with dose reductions; doses were reduced in 60% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 25% of those who received everolimus. Discontinuation of study treatment owing to adverse events occurred in 9% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 10% of those who received everolimus. Conclusions Progression-free survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus among patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. (Funded by Exelixis; METEOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01865747 .).
New England Journal of Medicine 09/2015; DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1510016 · 55.87 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This review provides updated information published in 2014 regarding advances and major achievements in genitourinary cancer. Sections include the best in prostate cancer, renal cancer, bladder cancer, and germ cell tumors. In the field of prostate cancer, data related to treatment approach of hormone-sensitive disease, castrate-resistant prostate cancer, mechanisms of resistance, new drugs, and molecular research are presented. In relation to renal cancer, relevant aspects in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma, immunotherapy, and molecular research, including angiogenesis and von Hippel-Lindau gene, molecular biology of non-clear cell histologies, and epigenetics of clear renal cell cancer are described. New strategies in the management of muscle-invasive localized bladder cancer and metastatic disease are reported as well as salient findings of biomolecular research in urothelial cancer. Some approaches intended to improve outcomes in poor prognosis patients with metastatic germ cell cancer are also reported. Results of clinical trials in these areas are discussed.
CANCER AND METASTASIS REVIEW 07/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10555-015-9577-x · 7.23 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objectives:
Rescue lymphadenectomy for testicular cancer is a complex surgery, with a high number of complications. The laparoscopic approach appears to offer faster recovery and improved quality of life compared with open surgery. The aim of our study is to report on our experience and to define whether there is a limit (oncological, anatomical or technical) for laparoscopic management.
Material and methods:
A retrospective study was conducted of 15 patients who underwent laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy after chemotherapy. In addition to epidemiological and oncologic variables, we analyzed the mean surgical time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, the mean hospital stay and the mean follow-up time.
The mean surgical time was 294 minutes (range, 180-240). There were 4 large-vessel vascular lesions, all of which were large-volume retroperitoneal masses, with diameters >7 cm. The rate of postoperative complications was 33%; there was only 1 case of Clavien >III. The mean hospital stay was 5.38 days (range, 2-9), and the mean patient follow-up was 28.9 months (range, 1-79). There was no recurrence in any of the cases.
The laparoscopic approach is an oncologically safe option for the rescue treatment of testicular cancer. The complex location of these masses entails the onset of severe intraoperative complications. We have observed a clear relationship between vascular complications and large masses (>7 cm). We therefore believe that it would be appropriate to establish a limit on the size for laparoscopic treatment.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Rescue lymphadenectomy for testicular cancer is a complex surgery, with a high number of complications. The laparoscopic approach appears to offer faster recovery and improved quality of life compared with open surgery. The aim of our study is to report on our experience and to define whether there is a limit (oncological, anatomical or technical) for laparoscopic management.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
We aimed to analyze prognostic factors for relapse in stage I seminoma managed by either active surveillance or adjuvant chemotherapy, and to describe the long-term patterns of recurrence in both groups.
Patients and methods:
From 1994 to 2008, 744 patients were included in three consecutive, prospective risk-adapted studies by the Spanish Germ Cell Cancer Group. Low-risk patients were managed by surveillance and high-risk patients were given two courses of adjuvant carboplatin. Relapses were treated mainly with chemotherapy. Patient age, tumor size, histological variant, pT staging, rete testis invasion, and preoperative serum BHCG levels were assessed for prediction of disease-free survival (DFS).
After a median follow-up of 80 months, 63 patients (11.1%) have relapsed: 51/396 (14.8%) on surveillance and 12/348 (3.2%) following adjuvant carboplatin. Actuarial overall 5-year DFS was 92.3% (88.3% for surveillance versus 96.8% for chemotherapy, P = 0.0001). Median time to relapse was 14 months. Most recurrences were located at retroperitoneum (86%), with a median tumor size of 26 mm. All patients were rendered disease-free with chemotherapy (92%), radiotherapy (5%), or surgery followed by chemotherapy (3%). A nomogram was developed from surveillance patients that includes two independent, predictive factors for relapse: rete testis invasion and tumor size (as a continuous variable).
Long-term follow-up confirms the risk-adapted approach as an effective option for patients with stage I seminoma. The pattern of relapses after adjuvant chemotherapy is similar to that observed following surveillance. A new nomogram for prediction of DFS among patients on surveillance is proposed. Rete testis invasion and tumor size should be taken into account when considering the administration of adjuvant carboplatin. Prospective validation is warranted.
Annals of Oncology 09/2014; 25(11). DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdu437 · 7.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The availability of agents directly targeting tumorigenic and angiogenic pathways has significantly improved the outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in recent years. However, all patients eventually become resistant and a substantial percentage experience immediate disease progression with first-line targeted therapy. In addition, patients have variable clinical benefit and/or tolerance to different agents, including drugs within the same class. Thus, the choice of therapy for an individual patient remains empiric at present. Upon this landscape, several molecular biomarkers have been investigated with the purpose of guiding therapy. This review discusses prognostic biomarkers correlating with the outcome of patients independent of therapy, and predictive biomarkers of treatment response, including circulating biomarkers (such as vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] and VEGF-related proteins, cytokine and angiogenic factors, and lactate dehydrogenase), and tissue-based biomarkers (such as single nucleotide polymorphisms). Many potential prognostic and predictive molecular biomarkers have now been identified in RCC, although none has yet entered into clinical practice, and all require prospective validation in appropriately designed randomized studies. In the near-future, however, validated biomarkers may become integral to management strategies in RCC, enabling tailored treatment for individual patients to improve clinical outcomes.
Clinical Cancer Research 02/2014; 20(8). DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-1351 · 8.72 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objectives:
Despite the uncertain value of adjuvant chemotherapy after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) it is clear that impaired renal function represents a contraindication to its administration. The objective of this study was to identify possible predictive clinical factors for impaired renal function following RNU in patients with upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UUT-UCC).
Patients and methods:
A retrospective analysis was conducted of 546 patients who underwent RNU between 1992 and 2008 at our institution. Data of interest for this study included estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), age, pathological stage and preoperative hydronephrosis (HN). The predictive value of HN, age and pathological stage for impaired renal function after RNU was calculated by multivariate linear regression analysis.
In total, 138 patients met the criteria for inclusion, including 108 men (78%). Mean age at surgery was 67 ± 10 years. There was a significant correlation (p < 0.001) between pre- and postoperative eGFR (decrease of 21% after NU). Preoperative HN was present in 51 patients (37%). On linear regression analysis, preoperative eGFR ≤60 ml/min (p = 0.012; OR = 4.60) and HN (p = 0.027; OR = 10.34) were confirmed to be predictive factors for a postoperative eGFR ≤60 ml/min. When postoperative eGFR ≤45 ml/min was used as the criterion for impaired renal function, predictive factors proved to be preoperative eGFR ≤45 ml/min (p < 0.0001; OR = 18.53), HN (p = 0.038; OR = 0.380) and age ≥70 years (p < 0.0001; OR = 0.169).
Preoperative HN, older age and preoperative eGFR <60 ml/min were proven to be predictive factors for impaired renal function after RNU. In these settings, neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be considered.
Urologia Internationalis 11/2013; 92(2). DOI:10.1159/000353652 · 1.43 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Patients with bone metastases from advanced cancer often experience skeletal-related events (SRE), which cause substantial pain and morbidity. Denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits RANK Ligand (RANKL), is a novel bone-targeted agent with a distinct mechanism of action relative to the bisphosphonate zoledronic acid, for prevention of SRE. This pre-planned analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of denosumab versus zoledronic acid across three pivotal studies.
Patient-level data from three identically designed, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trials of patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, other solid tumours or multiple myeloma were combined. End-points included time to first SRE, time to first and subsequent (multiple) SRE, adverse events, time to disease progression and overall survival.
Denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in delaying time to first on-study SRE by a median 8.21months, reducing the risk of a first SRE by 17% (hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.76-0.90]; P<0.001). Efficacy was demonstrated for first and multiple events and across patient subgroups (prior SRE status; age). Disease progression and overall survival were similar between the treatments. In contrast to zoledronic acid, denosumab did not require monitoring or dose modification/withholding based on renal status, and was not associated with acute-phase reactions. Hypocalcaemia was more common for denosumab. Osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred at a similar rate (P=0.13).
Denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in preventing SRE with favourable safety and convenience in patients with bone metastases from advanced cancer.
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 09/2012; 48(16):3082-92. DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2012.08.002 · 5.42 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in the male population in Western countries, second to skin cancer. Hormonal therapy allows long-lasting and effective control of cancer-related symptoms in advanced stages; however, in almost all patients with metastatic PCa the disease will progress when it becomes castration-resistant (CRPC). Chemotherapy with docetaxel was a turning point in CRPC, as, for the first time, it resulted in an increased survival time in comparison with mitoxantrone and prednisone. Combination therapy with docetaxel and prednisone is the first-line treatment of choice. Once the cancer has progressed, there is no clear alternative, although some new agents have shown promise in the treatment of this type of cancer. This review will provide an overview of the current status of CRPC, including clinical status, prognosis, firstline treatment and new second-line treatment options.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Hormonal therapy allows effective control of cancer-related symptoms in advanced stages. However, the disease will progress in almost all these metastatic prostate cancer patient until becoming resistant to androgen suppression. The emergence of new drugs will most probably have open up new expectations regarding the treatment of this cancer.
The aim of the present review has been to provide an overview of the current status of castration-resistant prostate cancer and to share the high expectations created with the new treatments.
Evidence was obtained from multidisciplinary meetings with the participation of urologists and oncologists, where they pooled the analysis of original articles in the literature and defined the content of the article.
Chemotherapy with docetaxel was a turning point in castration-resistant prostate cancer after the failure of hormonal therapy failure. For the first time, it achieved increased survival time in comparison with mitoxantrone and prednisone. Combination therapy with docetaxel and prednisone is the first-line choice treatment. Once the cancer has progressed, there is no clear alternative, although some novel agents have created expectations for the treatment of this type of cancer.
The range of therapeutic options for castration-resistant prostate cancer has increased dramatically with the arrival of new drugs. At present, cabazitaxel, and in the near future, abiraterone, have been found to be effective drugs in second-line treatment after progression to docetaxel, increasing survival by 2-4 months and reducing risk of death by 30-35%.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION Sunitinib, an oral, multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, delays disease progression, with a median overall survival (OS) of more than 2 years, improves quality of life and is becoming the first-line standard of care for metastatic renal carcinoma (mRCC). PURPOSE To assess the economic value of sunitinib as fi rst-line therapy in mRCC within the Spanish healthcare system. METHODS An adapted Markov model with a 10-year time horizon was used to analyse the cost effectiveness of sunitinib vs. sorafenib (SFN) and bevacizumab/interferon-α (BEV/IFN) as first-line mRCC therapy from the Spanish third-party payer perspective. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS data from sunitinib, SFN and BEV/IFN pivotal trials were extrapolated to project survival and costs in 6-week cycles. Results, in progression-free life-years (PFLY), life years (LY) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained, expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) with costs and benefits discounted annually at 3%, were obtained using deterministic and probabilistic analyses. RESULTS Sunitinib was more effective and less costly than both SFN (gains of 0.52 PFLY, 0.16 LY, 0.17 QALY) and BEV/IFN (gains of 0.19 PFLY, 0.23 LY, 0.16 QALY) with average cost savings/patients of €1,124 and €23,218, respectively. Using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of €50,000/QALY, sunitinib achieved an incremental net benefit (INB) of €9,717 and €31,211 compared with SFN and BEV/IFN, respectively. At this WTP, the probability of sunitinib providing the highest INB was 75%. CONCLUSION Our analysis suggests that sunitinib is a costeffective alternative to other targeted therapies as first-line mRCC therapy in the Spanish healthcare setting.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) has changed little in the last twenty years. The gold standard treatment is still cystectomy, but it has a significant negative impact on quality of life. Bladder-preservation strategies can be used in some cases but patient selection for this approach remains unclear. New chemotherapy and biologic agents in combination with surgery or radiotherapy could improve results and these possibilities are currently under investigation.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Non-seminomatous germ cell cancer (NSGCC) is a curable disease; its treatment has not essentially changed since the 1980s. BEP (bleomycin, etoposide, cisplatin) chemotherapy remains the standard of care. NSGCC's management can be summarised by three trees of decision, which contemplate staging, treatment with chemotherapy and management of postchemotherapy residual disease. The role of high-dose chemotherapy remains to be established. TIP (paclitaxel, iposfamide, cisplatin) chemotherapy is still the standard salvage treatment for patients progressing after BEP chemotherapy. Surgical removal of any residual disease is mandatory. For patients with poor prognosis, consultation with a centre of expertise is strongly recommended.
Clinical and Translational Oncology 08/2011; 13(8):565-8. · 2.08 Impact Factor