Publications (87)677.24 Total impact
-
Article: Management of Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer-Recent Advances and Optimal Sequence of Treatments.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Until 2010, chemotherapy with docetaxel was the only approved agent for treatment of metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Since then, the therapeutic landscape of mCRPC has changed rapidly. Multiple novel agents have received regulatory approval after demonstrating improved overall survival in separate randomized Phase 3 studies. These include immunotherapeutic agent sipuleucel-T, androgen axis inhibitors abiraterone and enzalutamide, and a novel microtubule inhibitor cabazitaxel. More recently, radium-223, a bone-targeting alpha emitting radiopharmaceutical, was reported to improve skeletal related events, as well as overall survival in a Phase 3 randomized study. Additionally, there are several promising agents in the advanced stages of clinical development. Here, we describe the agents recently shown to improve overall survival, and those that have reached the advanced stages of development in Phase 3 clinical trials. We will also propose a strategy for optimal sequencing of these agents in the treatment of mCRPC.Current Urology Reports 04/2013; -
Article: Stage II Disease, Elderly Patients, Secondary Neoplasms, and the MOSAIC Trial.
Journal of Clinical Oncology 03/2013; · 18.37 Impact Factor -
Article: Venous thromboembolic events with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A trial-level meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative risk (RR) of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) associated with approved vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Eligible studies included randomized phase 2 and 3 trials comparing arms with and without a Food and Drug Administration-approved VEGFR TKI (sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, vandetanib, and axitinib). Statistical analyses calculated the RR and 95% confidence intervals (CI), using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on heterogeneity. A total of 7441 patients from 9 phase III trials and 8 phase II trials were selected. The RR of all grade and high-grade VTEs for the TKI vs. no TKI arms was 1.10 (95% CI 0.73-1.66, p=0.64) and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.58-1.25, p=0.41), respectively. No difference in risk was found based on tumor type, age and trial design. The majority of trials exhibited high quality per Jadad scoring and no heterogeneity or publication bias was found.Critical reviews in oncology/hematology 01/2013; · 5.27 Impact Factor -
Article: Time from Prior Chemotherapy Enhances Prognostic Risk Grouping in the Second-line Setting of Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: A Retrospective Analysis of Pooled, Prospective Phase 2 Trials.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Outcomes for patients in the second-line setting of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) are dismal. The recognized prognostic factors in this context are Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) >0, hemoglobin level (Hb) <10g/dl, and liver metastasis (LM). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this retrospective study of prospective trials was to investigate the prognostic value of time from prior chemotherapy (TFPC) independent of known prognostic factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from patients from seven prospective trials with available baseline TFPC, Hb, PS, and LM values were used for retrospective analysis (n=570). External validation was conducted in a second-line phase 3 trial comparing best supportive care (BSC) versus vinflunine plus BSC (n=352). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the association of factors, with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) being the respective primary and secondary outcome measures. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: ECOG-PS >0, LM, Hb <10g/dl, and shorter TFPC were significant prognostic factors for OS and PFS on multivariable analysis. Patients with zero, one, two, and three to four factors demonstrated median OS of 12.2, 6.7, 5.1, and 3.0 mo, respectively (concordance statistic=0.638). Setting of prior chemotherapy (metastatic disease vs perioperative) and prior platinum agent (cisplatin or carboplatin) were not prognostic factors. External validation demonstrated a significant association of TFPC with PFS on univariable and most multivariable analyses, and with OS on univariable analyses. Limitations of retrospective analyses are applicable. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter TFPC enhances prognostic classification independent of ECOG-PS >0, Hb <10g/dl, and LM in the setting of second-line therapy for advanced UC. These data may facilitate drug development and interpretation of trials.European urology 11/2012; · 7.67 Impact Factor -
Article: Survival Prediction in Everolimus-treated Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Incorporating Tumor Burden Response in the RECORD-1 Trial.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The phase 3 RECORD-1 study demonstrated clinical benefit of everolimus over placebo (median progression-free survival: 4.9 mo compared with 1.9 mo, p<0.001) in treatment-resistant patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) objective response rate was low. OBJECTIVE: To explore the potential role of tumor burden response to everolimus in predicting patient survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: RECORD-1 patients with at least two tumor assessments (baseline and weeks 2-14) were included (n=246). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: A multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the impact of various prognostic factors on overall survival (OS). Components of RECIST progression were explored using univariate Cox regression. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The baseline sum of longest tumor diameters (SLD) and progression at weeks 2-14 were prognostic factors of OS by multivariate analysis. Univariate analysis at weeks 2-14 demonstrated that growth of nontarget lesions and appearance of new lesions were predictive of OS (p<0.001). This retrospective analysis used data from one arm of one trial; patients in the placebo arm were excluded because of confounding effects when they crossed over to everolimus. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis identified baseline SLD as a predictive factor of OS, and the appearance of a new lesion or progression of a nontarget lesion at first assessment after baseline also affects OS in patients with mRCC treated with everolimus. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00410124.European urology 11/2012; · 7.67 Impact Factor -
Article: New perspectives in the therapy of castration resistant prostate cancer.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Prostate Cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men in the Western World. Docetaxel-based chemotherapy has been the mainstay of treatment until a few years ago for metastatic castration resistant prostatic cancer (mCRPC). Recently, a broad range of therapeutic options has become available for mCRPC in a variety of settings, including chemotherapeutic agents (cabazitaxel), androgen synthesis inhibitors (abiraterone acetate), androgen receptor (AR) inhibitors (enzalutamide) and immunotherapy (sipuleucel-T). Multiple novel targeted agents are at an advanced stage of experimentation, including androgen synthesis inhibitors (TAK700), AR inhibitors (ARN509), radiopharmaceuticals (radium-223) and immunotherapeutic agents (poxvirus-based vaccine, ipilimumab). This review describes in detail the latest results obtained with a the most promising agents in prostate cancer, with a focus on CRPC biology and mechanism of resistance to anti-neoplastic treatment.Current drug targets 10/2012; · 3.93 Impact Factor -
Article: False Positive 2-(18)Fluroro-deoxy-D-Glucose Positron Emission Tomography (FDG-PET) in Patients with Disseminated Seminoma and Post-Chemotherapy Residual Masses.
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer 09/2012; · 2.61 Impact Factor -
Article: ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: Chemotherapy for Urothelial Carcinoma-Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Settings.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: CONTEXT: We present a summary of the Second International Consultation on Bladder Cancer recommendations on chemotherapy for the treatment of bladder cancer using an evidence-based strategy. OBJECTIVE: To review the data regarding chemotherapy in patients with clinically localized and metastatic bladder cancer with a focus on its use for patients in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Medline databases were searched for original articles published prior to April 1, 2012, using the following search terms: bladder cancer, urothelial cancer, metastatic, advanced, neoadjuvant, and adjuvant therapy. Proceedings of major conferences from the last 5 yr also were searched. Novel and promising drugs currently in clinical trials were included. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The major findings are addressed in an evidence-based manner. Prospective trials and important cohort data were analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy for advanced and metastatic bladder cancer is an established standard, improving overall survival. In the advanced setting, cisplatin-ineligible patients may benefit from gemcitabine and carboplatin. Meta-analyses undertaken for neoadjuvant cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy show a 5% benefit in overall survival. Pathologic complete remission may be an intermediate surrogate for survival, but requires further validation. Use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is low, and is attributable to patient and physician choice because of limited benefit, advanced age, and comorbidities including renal and/or cardiac dysfunction. Sufficient data to support adjuvant chemotherapy are lacking.European urology 08/2012; · 7.67 Impact Factor -
Article: What is the optimal therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who progress on an initial VEGFr-TKI?
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Sequential treatment with targeted therapies is the current standard of care for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Most patients are initially treated with a first-line vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFr-TKI), but will eventually develop resistance and subsequent disease progression. Patients with mRCC whose disease progresses during initial VEGFr-TKI therapy may continue treatment with a different VEGFr-TKI or they may switch to treatment with a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor which has a different mechanism of action. Based on positive results of the phase III RECORD-1 trial, clinical guidelines in the United States and Europe recommend use of everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, in patients with VEGFr-TKI-refractory mRCC. Positive results of the phase III AXIS trial led to recent approval in the United States of the VEGFr-TKI axitinib for use in patients with mRCC who failed one previous therapy. VEGFr-TKIs and mTOR inhibitors have distinct clinical effects with differing safety profiles, but to date, no head-to-head comparisons in the post-VEGFr-TKI second-line setting are available. This review discusses multiple factors that should be considered when selecting a second-line therapy for patients with VEGFr-TKI-refractory mRCC, including evidence-based guidelines, efficacy, safety, patient profile, and clinician familiarity with available agents.Cancer treatment reviews 07/2012; · 5.30 Impact Factor -
Article: The optimize project: beyond first-line therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
CANCER AND METASTASIS REVIEW 07/2012; 31 Suppl 1:S1-2. · 9.35 Impact Factor -
Article: Sequential therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: pre-clinical and clinical rationale for selecting a second- or subsequent-line therapy with a different mechanism of action.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Few types of cancer have had their treatment evolve as rapidly as metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Since 2005, six new targeted therapies with proven efficacy have been approved for the treatment of mRCC. The downside is that our knowledge about the mechanisms of action of these therapies and the intrinsic and extrinsic mechanism of resistance has not evolved equally fast, and many questions remain unanswered. The only approved agent to date in the European Union for patients who progress on sunitinib or sorafenib is everolimus. The results of the phase III trial comparing axitinib vs. sorafenib after failure on sunitinib, bevacizumab, temsirolimus, or cytokines have recently been published, and axitinib has recently been licensed by the Food and Drugs Administration. Other phase III trials that are being conducted include a comparison between everolimus plus bevacizumab and everolimus after failure on tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and between temsirolimus and sorafenib after failure on sunitinib. In this article, we will review the available evidence from clinical studies on sequential therapy for mRCC, including those that are still in progress. In addition, information on the mechanism of resistance or tolerance to first-line therapy, recommendations of the main practice guidelines for second-line treatment, potential therapies for third or successive treatment lines, and the major reasons why patients who progress may benefit from a change of mechanism of action will also be discussed.CANCER AND METASTASIS REVIEW 06/2012; 31 Suppl 1:S11-7. · 9.35 Impact Factor -
Article: A systematic review of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is a disease with a pattern of predominantly distant and early recurrences. Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy has demonstrated improved outcomes for MIBC. To review the data supporting perioperative chemotherapy and emerging regimens for MIBC. Medline databases were searched for original articles published before April 1, 2012, with the search terms bladder cancer, urothelial cancer, radical cystectomy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy. Proceedings from the last 5 yr of major conferences were also searched. Novel and promising drugs that have reached clinical trial evaluation were included. The major findings are addressed in an evidence-based fashion. Prospective trials and important preclinical data were analyzed. Cisplatin-based neoadjuvant combination chemotherapy is an established standard, improving overall survival in MIBC. Pathologic complete response appears to be an intermediate surrogate for survival, but this finding requires further validation. Definitive data to support adjuvant chemotherapy do not exist, and there are no data to support perioperative therapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients. Utilization of neoadjuvant cisplatin is low, attributable in part to patient/physician choice and the advanced age of patients, who often have multiple comorbidities including renal and/or cardiac dysfunction. Trials are using the neoadjuvant paradigm to detect incremental pathologic response to chemobiologic regimens and brief neoadjuvant single-agent therapy to screen for the biologic activity of agents.European urology 06/2012; 62(3):523-33. · 7.67 Impact Factor -
Article: Cisplatin and gemcitabine administered every two weeks in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and impaired renal function.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. However, standard dose schedule of cisplatin cannot be used in patients with impaired renal function. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine and a split dose administration of cisplatin in patients with renal dysfunction. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with creatinine clearance between 35 and 59 ml/min received gemcitabine 2500 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 35 mg/m(2) on day 1 and day 15 for an every 28 day schedule. Between March 2004 and November 2009, 38 patients were treated. Median creatinine clearance was 49 ml/min. Median number of cycles per patient was 3 (1-7). There were 15 partial responses (39%) and 12 patients had stable disease (31%). Median progression free survival and overall survival were 3.5 and 8.5 months (mo), respectively. Grade 3-4 haematological toxicities were: neutropenia 9%, anaemia 6% and thrombocytopenia 16%. No patient developed renal toxicity. Biweekly gemcitabine and cisplatin is an active and feasible regimen in this subset of patients and could be an option for unfit patients. However, results seem not to be superior to those obtained with carboplatin based regimens in this population of patients.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 05/2012; 48(12):1816-21. · 4.12 Impact Factor -
Article: Follow-up after surgical treatment of bladder cancer: a critical analysis of the literature.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Follow-up of patients treated for bladder cancer (BCa) is of great importance for both non-muscle-invasive BCa (NMIBC) and muscle-invasive BCa (MIBC) because of the high incidence of recurrence and progression. The schedule and methods of follow-up should reflect the individual clinical situation. To evaluate the existing evidence for intensity and duration of follow-up recommendations in patients after surgical treatment of BCa. We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for published data on the follow-up of patients with NMIBC and MIBC after radical cystectomy (RC). Follow-up in patients with NMIBC is necessary because of the high probability of tumour recurrence and the risk of progression. Cystoscopy plus cytology are the standard methods for follow-up. Cystoscopy should be done 3 mo after the transurethral resection in every patient, and the frequency after that depends on the individual recurrence/progression risk. Cytology should be used as an adjunctive method to cystoscopy in intermediate- and high-risk patients. None of the currently available urinary markers or imaging methods can substitute for cystoscopy-based follow-up. High-risk NMIBC patients require regular lifelong upper urinary tract monitoring. Follow-up in MIBC is based on the fact that early detection of recurrence after RC allows for timely treatment with the aim of improving outcomes. Patients with extravesical and lymph node-positive disease should have the most intensive follow-up because of the highest recurrence risk. Routine upper urinary tract imaging is advisable for all patients and should continue in the long term. Follow-up also allows for early detection of urinary diversion-related complications, the rate of which increases with time. Follow-up in BCa is necessary for diagnosing recurrence and progression, as well as for evaluating complications after radical treatment. Since randomised studies investigating the most appropriate follow-up schedule are lacking, most recommendations are based on only the retrospective experience. Nonetheless, reasonable recommendations can be made until further prospective randomised studies testing different follow-up schedules have been performed.European urology 05/2012; 62(2):290-302. · 7.67 Impact Factor -
Article: The double edged sword of bleeding and clotting from VEGF inhibition in renal cancer patients.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors have significantly improved outcomes in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Multiple VEGF inhibiting orally administered tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been approved including sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib and most recently, axitinib. One VEGF inhibiting monoclonal antibody, bevacizumab, is approved in combination with interferon. However, these agents, besides the known progression-free survival benefits, are associated with a small but real risk of potentially life threatening and contrasting toxicities of thrombosis (both venous and arterial) and bleeding. Appropriate patient selection for VEGF inhibitors and prevention as well as prompt intervention to manage thrombosis and bleeding are necessary to forestall serious morbidities and mortality.Current Oncology Reports 04/2012; 14(4):295-306. · 2.55 Impact Factor -
Article: Advances in the management of high-risk localised and metastatic prostate cancer.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: At the third annual Interactive Genitourinary Cancer Conference, held in Budapest from 30 April to 1 May 2011, the latest developments in the management of patients with high-risk localised and metastatic prostate cancer were discussed. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in Western men and, for advanced disease, no curative agents are available. For men with high-risk localised disease there is debate about the best treatment approaches, with both radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy shown to improve outcomes. These approaches have started to be augmented as new techniques and therapies are developed. For instance, radiation therapy combined with androgen deprivation therapy has been shown to be more efficacious than radiation therapy alone, and there may also be a role for adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ultimately a multidisciplinary approach will most probably result in the best outcomes for patients. The use of androgen deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer needs to be monitored carefully, given that it results in adverse alterations in several metabolic parameters and an increased risk of further coronary events in men with cardiovascular disease in some studies. Until recently there were limited options for the management of men with advanced prostate cancer, but new agents for use in the post-docetaxel setting have recently been approved. These are cabazitaxel and abiraterone acetate, which have both shown a significant survival benefit in patients who have progressed on docetaxel. Additional agents, for these patients and for patients at other stages of disease, are in the later stages of development. The development of new agents has been aided by a greater understanding of the molecular mechanisms of resistance to current therapies and the recognition of new pathophysiological pathways. As the number of available therapeutic options increases, it will become increasingly important to tailor treatments to the individual patient. This may require the development of novel biomarkers or the use of existing or new predictive tools based on prognostic factors. To ensure optimal patient care, early and continuous involvement of the multidisciplinary team will be required.BJU International 03/2012; 109 Suppl 2:8-13. · 2.84 Impact Factor -
Article: Practical aspects of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer management: patient case studies.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Interactive case studies formed a key feature of the third annual Interactive Genitourinary Cancer Conference held in April/May 2011 in Budapest, Hungary. These cases were used to discuss the practical aspects of the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Particular emphasis was placed on audience participation with potential management options posed as interactive questions to the delegates. This paper summarises these case studies and the related discussion. Docetaxel is the standard first-line chemotherapeutic agent for patients with mCRPC and, until recently, second-line therapeutic options were limited. Results from the recently completed TROPIC trial showed a statistically and clinically significant improvement in overall survival with the microtubule inhibitor cabazitaxel compared with mitoxantrone. Cabazitaxel has been shown to be well tolerated and has been approved in Europe and the USA as second-line chemotherapy for mCRPC. Prognostic factors have a potential benefit in individualised patient management in mCRPC. Pretreatment prognostic factors, including PSA doubling time, pain, visceral metastases, anaemia and progression of osseous metastases, have been shown to predict survival outcomes and can be used to guide treatment strategies, including appropriate timing of chemotherapy. Multiple treatment options and significant heterogeneity among patients with advanced prostate cancer necessitate multidisciplinary team management in addition to patient education, as part of a patient-centred approach. The development of second-line chemotherapeutic agents together with the use of prognostic factors and a patient-centred multidisciplinary team approach provide encouraging new management prospects for patients with mCRPC.BJU International 03/2012; 109 Suppl 2:14-9. · 2.84 Impact Factor -
Article: Randomized phase III study comparing paclitaxel/cisplatin/gemcitabine and gemcitabine/cisplatin in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer without prior systemic therapy: EORTC Intergroup Study 30987.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The combination of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) is a standard regimen in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. A phase I/II study suggested that a three-drug regimen that included paclitaxel had greater antitumor activity and might improve survival. We conducted a randomized phase III study to compare paclitaxel/cisplatin/gemcitabine (PCG) with GC in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, and toxicity. From 2001 to 2004, 626 patients were randomly assigned; 312 patients were assigned to PCG, and 314 patients were assigned to GC. After a median follow-up of 4.6 years, the median OS was 15.8 months on PCG versus 12.7 months on GC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; P = .075). OS in the subgroup of all eligible patients was significantly longer on PCG (3.2 months; HR, 0.82; P = .03), as was the case in patients with bladder primary tumors. PFS was not significantly longer on PCG (HR, 0.87; P = .11). Overall response rate was 55.5% on PCG and 43.6% on GC (P = .0031). Both treatments were well tolerated, with more thrombocytopenia and bleeding on GC than PCG (11.4% v 6.8%, respectively; P = .05) and more febrile neutropenia on PCG than GC (13.2% v 4.3%, respectively; P < .001). The addition of paclitaxel to GC provides a higher response rate and a 3.1-month survival benefit that did not reach statistical significance. Novel approaches will be required to obtain major improvements in survival of incurable urothelial cancer.Journal of Clinical Oncology 02/2012; 30(10):1107-13. · 18.37 Impact Factor -
Article: Current vaccination strategies for prostate cancer.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The first therapeutic cancer vaccine demonstrating effectiveness in a phase 3 study was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration on 29 April 2010. The pivotal trial demonstrated overall survival (OS) benefit in patients treated with antigen-loaded leukapheresis cells compared with a control infusion. Results of other prostate cancer (PCa) vaccination strategies are awaited, as this approach may herald a new era in the care for patients with advanced PCa. Consider effectiveness and safety of vaccination strategies in the treatment of PCa. We searched three bibliographic databases (January 1995 through October 2010) for randomised phase 2 and 3 studies of vaccination strategies for PCa based on predetermined relevant Medical Subject Heading terms and free text terms. Data from 3 randomised phase 3 and 10 randomised phase 2 vaccination trials are discussed with respect to clinical outcome in terms of progression-free survival and OS, toxicity, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, and immunologic response. Three phase 3 trials (D9901, D9902A, and D9902B) that enrolled a total of 737 patients, all controlled and double-blinded, tested the efficacy of sipuleucel-T. The largest of these three trials, called Immunotherapy for Prostate Adenocarcinoma Treatment (IMPACT), has demonstrated safety and effectiveness of sipuleucel-T (now marketed as Provenge) as measured by prolonged survival of 512 asymptomatic patients with metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC). The study showed a 4.1-mo median survival benefit in the sipuleucel-T vaccine-treated group compared with the control group (25.8 vs 21.7 mo; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-0.98; p=0.032) and extended 3-yr survival (31.7% vs 23.0%). In contrast, two phase 3 vaccination trials with a whole-tumour-cell mixture of two PCa cell lines (GVAX) and testing GVAX either alone or in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone (VITAL1 and 2) were terminated prematurely based on futility and increased deaths. Other phase 2 vaccination trials testing different types of vaccines in castration-resistant PCa patients have been reported with variable outcomes. Notably, a controlled, double-blind, randomised phase 2 vaccine trial of PROSTVAC-VF, a recombinant viral vector containing complementary DNA encoding PSA, in 125 patients with chemotherapy-naïve, minimally symptomatic mCRPC also demonstrated safety but no significant effect on the time to disease progression. In comparison with controls (n=40), PROSTVAC-VF-treated patients (n=82) experienced longer median survival of 8.5 mo (25.1 vs 16.6 mo; HR: 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.85; p=0.0061) and extended 3-yr survival (30% vs 17%). In general, PCa vaccines are perceived to have less toxicity compared with current cytotoxic or targeted therapies. Evaluation of clinical efficacy of different vaccination strategies (eg, protein-, peptide- and DNA-based vaccines) in the context of properly designed and controlled phase 3 studies is warranted. Cancer vaccines represent a new paradigm in the treatment of PCa. The IMPACT trial showed improved survival but no difference in time to disease progression in mCRPC patients with minimal tumour burden. Observations in phase 2 and 3 trials pave the way for other vaccination approaches for this disease, raise questions regarding the most appropriate clinical trial designs, and underscore the importance of identifying biomarkers for antitumour effect to better implement such therapies.European urology 02/2012; 61(2):290-306. · 7.67 Impact Factor -
Article: Optimisation of the size variation threshold for imaging evaluation of response in patients with platinum-refractory advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium treated with vinflunine.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Vinflunine (VFL) has been approved in the European Union for second-line treatment of advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract (TCCU) in patients who progress after a platinum based regimen. However, very few patients achieve response by response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST). Therefore, another 'response' threshold may be more useful than RECIST 1.0 in this setting. One hundred and seventy nine patients with advanced TCCU treated with second-line VFL therapy had chest Computed Tomography (CT) and abdominal/pelvic CT or MRI performed at baseline and at first follow-up (6 weeks ± 3 days) after therapy initiation. Tumour measurements and response by RECIST 1.0 were correlated with overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were then used to determine the optimal size threshold to define 'responders'. Impact of adverse prognostic factors including Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) >0, Hb <10 g/dL, and liver metastases was analysed. Tumour response included 13 partial responses (PR) by RECIST 1.0 and 52 patients with ≥ 10% decrease in the sum of longest diameters. Responders by RECIST 1.0 did not have a statistically significant improvement in OS, while patients with sum long axis diameter (SLD) reduction of ≥ 10% had a longer OS than those with SLD reduction of <10%: 11.3 versus 6.9 months (log rank p=0.0224). ROC analysis yielded ≥ 10% decrease in SLD as the optimal size change correlating with OS. These results persisted on multivariate analysis. In the study population, a ≥ 10% reduction in SLD at first follow-up imaging is a better early predictor of outcome than RECIST.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 12/2011; 48(10):1495-502. · 4.12 Impact Factor
Top co-authors
Top Journals
Institutions
-
2012–2013
-
University of Alabama at Birmingham
- Department of Medicine
Birmingham, AL, USA -
Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain -
Hospital Clínico San Carlos
Madrid, Madrid, Spain
-
-
2007–2013
-
Parc de Salut Mar
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain -
University of Barcelona
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
-
-
2011–2012
-
Hospital 12 de Octubre
- Department of Medical Oncology
Madrid, Madrid, Spain -
Mount Sinai School of Medicine
Manhattan, NY, USA -
Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz
Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany
-
-
2007–2011
-
Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
-
-
2010
-
US Oncology
The Woodlands, TX, USA -
Tulane University
New Orleans, LA, USA -
Harvard University
Boston, MA, USA -
Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale 8 Arezzo
Arezzo, Tuscany, Italy -
New York Medical College
New York City, NY, USA -
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Cancer Research
Vienna, Vienna, Austria
-
-
2009
-
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Boston, MA, USA -
Lund University
- Department of Oncology
Lund, Skane, Sweden
-
-
2008
-
Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria de Málaga
Málaga, Andalusia, Spain
-
-
2003
-
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
- Department of Medical Oncology
Rotterdam, South Holland, Netherlands
-
