scholarly journals Real-world outcomes in thoracic cancer patients with severe Acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (COVID-19): Single UK institution experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 100261
Author(s):  
Wanyuan Cui ◽  
Nadia Yousaf ◽  
Jaishree Bhosle ◽  
Anna Minchom ◽  
Andrew G. Nicholson ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Mosca ◽  
Ugo De Giorgi ◽  
Giuseppe Procopio ◽  
Umberto Basso ◽  
Giacomo Cartenì ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective Despite the current immunotherapy era, VEGFR inhibitors maintain effectiveness in metastatic renal cell cancer. Real-world data concerning pazopanib are limited. The aim of this study is to add information about efficacy and safety of pazopanib as first-line treatment in metastatic renal cell cancer patients not enrolled into clinical trials. Methods Retrospective analysis (the PAMERIT study) of first-line pazopanib in real-world metastatic renal cell cancer patients among 39 Centers in Italy. Outcomes were progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate and treatment-related adverse events. Kaplan–Meier curves, log-rank test and multivariable Cox’s models were used and adjusted for age, histology, previous renal surgery, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium score and pazopanib initial dose. Results Among 474 patients, 87.3% had clear cell metastatic renal cell cancer histology. Most of them (84.6%) had upfront renal surgery. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 15.8 and 34.4 months, respectively, significantly correlating with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s good prognosis (P < 0.001), ECOG PS 0 (P < 0.001), age (<75 years, P = 0.005), surgery (P < 0.001) and response to pazopanib (P < 0.001). After 3 months of pazopanib, overall disease control rate have been observed in 76.6% patients. Among International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s favorable group patients, 57/121 (47%) showed complete/partial response. No unexpected AEs emerged. Conclusions In this real-world study, metastatic renal cell cancer patients treated with first-line pazopanib reached greater progression-free survival and overall survival than in pivotal studies and had high response rates when belonging to International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s favorable group, without new toxicities. Pazopanib has been confirmed a valid first-line option for International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s good prognosis metastatic renal cell cancer patients who cannot be submitted to immunotherapy.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Christian Gessner ◽  
Karin Potthoff ◽  
Nikolaj Frost

<b><i>Background/Aim:</i></b> Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a common and serious complication in cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. This analysis was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of prophylaxis with lipegfilgrastim, a glycoPEGylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Data from two European non-interventional studies (NIS NADIR and NIS LEOS) investigating lipegfilgrastim for primary and secondary prophylaxis were pooled. Outcomes included the incidence of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN), use of anti-infectives and antimycotics, and adverse events and their relationship to lipegfilgrastim. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The safety population included 361 patients with lung cancer (median age, 66 years [range, 36–88]), of whom 322 had received 2 or more consecutive cycles of lipegfilgrastim (efficacy population [primary prophylaxis, 75.5%; secondary prophylaxis, 16.5%]). Almost 40% of the patients were considered to have a high risk (&#x3e;20%) of FN, and around 60% had an intermediate risk (10–20%). For all cycles, FN was reported in 3 patients (0.9%), neutropenia in 14 (4.3%), and grade 4 neutropenia in 9 (2.8%). Anti-infectives were used in 27 patients (8.4%) and antimycotics in 6 (1.9%). The incidence rates were lower for the patients’ first cycle (FN, 0.4%; neutropenia, 0.8%; grade 4 neutropenia, 0.8%; anti-infectives, 0.6%; antimycotics, 0.6%). Adverse drug reactions considered lipegfilgrastim related were reported in 35 patients (9.7%), and serious adverse drug reactions in 10 (2.8%). None of the fatal events reported in 28 patients (7.8%) were lipegfilgrastim related. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Lipegfilgrastim administered to patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice showed similar effectiveness and safety to that reported in published pivotal trials.


Breast Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takamichi Yokoe ◽  
Sasagu Kurozumi ◽  
Kazuki Nozawa ◽  
Yukinori Ozaki ◽  
Tetsuyo Maeda ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer after taxane with trastuzumab and pertuzumab is standard therapy. However, treatment strategies beyond T-DM1 are still in development with insufficient evidence of their effectiveness. Here, we aimed to evaluate real-world treatment choice and efficacy of treatments after T-DM1 for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Methods In this multi-centre retrospective cohort study involving 17 hospitals, 325 female HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients whose post-T-DM1 treatment began between April 15, 2014 and December 31, 2018 were enrolled. The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR) of post-T-DM1 treatments. Secondary end points included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), and overall survival (OS). Results The median number of prior treatments of post-T-DM1 treatment was four. The types of post-T-DM1 treatments included (1) chemotherapy in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab (n = 102; 31.4%), (2) chemotherapy concomitant with trastuzumab (n = 78; 24.0%), (3), lapatinib with capecitabine (n = 63; 19.4%), and (4) others (n = 82; 25.2%). ORR was 22.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 18.1–28.0], DCR = 66.6% (95% CI 60.8–72.0), median PFS = 6.1 months (95% CI 5.3–6.7), median TTF = 5.1 months (95% CI 4.4–5.6), and median OS = 23.7 months (95% CI 20.7–27.4). Conclusion The benefits of treatments after T-DM1 are limited. Further investigation of new treatment strategies beyond T-DM1 is awaited for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document