Systemic therapy for esophagogastric cancer: targeted therapies

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 48-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomas G. Lyons ◽  
Geoffrey Y. Ku
2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 287-287
Author(s):  
Diana Maslov ◽  
Karine Tawagi ◽  
Madhav KC ◽  
Richa Goel ◽  
Helen Yuan ◽  
...  

287 Background: There are many clinical trials that demonstrate the benefits of immunotherapies and targeted therapies in patients (pts) with advanced or metastatic RCC (mRCC). Most of these studies specifically exclude many real-world pts with comorbidities such as autoimmune disease, heart failure, and hypertension. Data on treatment efficacy and adverse events in patients with a history of uncontrolled hypertension is lacking, as there have been few studies analyzing more recently approved RCC drug regimens in real-world practice. Methods: We retrospectively collected data from pts with mRCC treated with immunotherapy and/or targeted therapies. Patient characteristics, performance status, treatment type, reason for treatment discontinuation, treatment response/progression per RECIST v1.1, survival, and presence of clinical trial exclusion criteria such as hypertension, heart failure, presence of autoimmune disease, renal or liver failure, and International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) Risk score were collected. Results: A total of 198 pts were included. The majority of patients received Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKIs) (42.42% pazopanib (n = 84), 21.71% sunitinib (n = 43), 13.64% cabozantinib (n = 27)), whereas 10.61% were on combination of axitinib + pembrolizumab (n = 21) and 11.62% received ipilimumab + nivolumab (n = 23), and. 71.72% of patients who qualified for systemic therapy had a history of uncontrolled hypertension, whereas 28.28 % of total patients had no history of uncontrolled hypertension. The median time on first-line treatment was 5.17 months. A history of hypertension did not significantly affect Overall Survival (OS), 15.90 months median OS for those with hypertension vs 27.80 median OS for those with no hypertension (p = 0.38). Median OS for all patients was 22.80 months. There was also no difference in response rate between those with a history of hypertension vs those with no history of uncontrolled hypertension (p = 0.65) or in Progression Free Survival (PFS) (p = 0.97) Data on how many patients developed exacerbations of hypertension on therapy will be available at time of presentation. Conclusions: Uncontrolled hypertension typically excludes patients from clinical trial enrollment. We found no difference in median OS in those with a history of hypertension compared to those with normal blood pressures. Further large-scale studies are needed to further determine outcomes in patients with hypertension on systemic therapy for mRCC.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15084-e15084
Author(s):  
Joann Hsu ◽  
Sumanta Kumar Pal ◽  
Przemyslaw Twardowski ◽  
Courtney Carmichael ◽  
Junmi Saikia ◽  
...  

e15084 Background: Sarcomatoid metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) represents an aggressive subset of disease, and a definitive therapeutic strategy is lacking. Methods: From an institutional database including 270 patients with mRCC, we identified 34 patients with documented sarcomatoid features. Within this cohort, we assessed 21 patients who received systemic therapy. Survival was assessed in the overall cohort and in subgroups divided by clinicopathologic characteristics, including the extent of sarcomatoid features, MSKCC risk criteria, and the nature of systemic therapy given. Available tissue from 11 of these patients has been identified for correlative studies to assess markers of epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT). Tissue will be obtained from a cohort of patients matched for age and MSKCC risk status (but lacking a sarcomatoid component) for comparison. Results: Of the 21 patients assessed, 2 patients received chemotherapy, 7 patients received immunotherapy, and 12 patients received targeted agents as their first line treatment. Median overall survival (OS) in the overall cohort was 18.0 months (95%CI 6.9-22.0). By MSKCC status, patients with poor-risk disease had a median OS of 4.7 months, as compared to 20.1 months for patients with intermediate-risk disease (HR 0.02, 95%CI 0.003-0.15; P=0.0001). Survival in subgroups stratified by the Heng criteria will be presented at the meeting. There was no significant difference in survival in patients with sarcomatoid predominant disease (>20%) vs non-predominant disease (HR 0.62, 95%CI 0.23-1.65; P=0.34), nor was there a difference amongst patients who received targeted therapies vs non-targeted therapies (HR 1.0, 95%CI 0.61-1.40; P=0.36). Correlative analyses are ongoing, and will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: As compared to previous retrospective series (Golshayan et al JCO 2009) and prospective trials (Haas et al Med Oncol 2011) assessing patients with sarcomatoid mRCC, the survival in our cohort was substantially prolonged. Further clinical and translational studies are needed to refine current prognostic schema for this disease, and to define the optimal therapeutic strategy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (03) ◽  
pp. 259-274
Author(s):  
Avinash Kambadakone ◽  
Vinit Baliyan ◽  
Andrew Zhu

AbstractIncreasing use of novel systemic treatment options in the management of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) such as antiangiogenic and molecular-targeted therapies, poses unique challenges for effective treatment monitoring and efficacy assessment. The traditional morphological criteria such as response evaluation criteria in solid tumor (RECIST) rely on changes in tumor size to determine treatment efficacy. However, these criteria based on tumor morphology may not be suitable to monitor response to newer targeted therapies as early functional changes induced by these drugs precede changes in tumor size. Modifications of these morphological criteria that determine response based on tumor enhancement characteristics such as modified RECIST (mRECIST) will potentially allow improved determination of treatment response pending validation from prospective trials. Advanced functional imaging techniques such as perfusion imaging (computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging [CT/MRI]), diffusion weighted MRI (DW-MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET/CT and PET/MRI) are being increasingly used as surrogate imaging biomarkers to provide superior assessment of changes in tumor physiology. Growing emphasis on precision oncological care tailored to specific tumor type and individual patients renders the use of these newer imaging modalities more pertinent and timely. In this review, the authors discuss the role of various imaging techniques and response assessment criteria in the evaluation of systemic therapy for advanced HCC with focus on functional imaging tools.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
SK Mahil ◽  
M Yates ◽  
SM Langan ◽  
ZZN Yiu ◽  
T Tsakok ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectivesRegistry data suggest that people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) receiving targeted systemic therapies have fewer adverse COVID-19 outcomes compared to patients receiving no systemic treatments. We used international patient survey data to explore the hypothesis that greater risk-mitigating behaviour in those receiving targeted therapies may account, at least in part, for this observation.MethodsOnline surveys were completed by individuals with Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMD) (UK only) or psoriasis (globally) between 4th May and 7th September 2020. We used multiple logistic regression to assess the association between treatment type and risk-mitigating behaviour, adjusting for clinical and demographic characteristics. We characterised international variation in a mixed effects model.ResultsOf 3,720 participants (2,869 psoriasis, 851 RMD) from 74 countries, 2,262 (60.8%) reported the most stringent risk-mitigating behaviour (classified here under the umbrella term ‘shielding’). A greater proportion of those receiving targeted therapies (biologics and JAK inhibitors) reported shielding compared to those receiving no systemic therapy (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.63, 95% CI 1.35-1.97) and standard systemic agents (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.22-1.56). Shielding was associated with established risk factors for severe COVID-19 (male sex [OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.05-1.24], obesity [OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.23-1.54], comorbidity burden [OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.15-1.78]), a primary indication of RMD (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.27-1.48) and a positive anxiety or depression screen (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.36-1.80). Modest differences in the proportion shielding were observed across nations.ConclusionsGreater risk-mitigating behaviour among people with IMIDs receiving targeted therapies may contribute to the reported lower risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes. The behaviour variation across treatment groups, IMIDs and nations reinforces the need for clear evidence-based patient communication on risk mitigation strategies and may help inform updated public health guidelines as the pandemic continues.Key messagesWhat is already known about this subject?At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with immune mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) on targeted systemic immunosuppressive therapy were considered to be at higher risk of severe COVID-19. Subsequent registry data suggest that this may not the case.What does this study add?Here we characterise shielding behaviour in patients with IMIDs from a global survey. We identified that targeted systemic therapy associates with increased shielding behaviour, as do demographic risk factors for severe COVID-19 including male gender and obesity.Shielding behaviour varies across nations, albeit modestly when case-mix is taken into account.How might this impact on clinical practice or future developments?Variable shielding behaviour amongst patients with IMIDs may be an important confounder when considering differential COVID-19 risk between therapy types, so should be accounted for in analyses where possible.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document