scholarly journals ATOMS (Adjustable Transobturator Male System) Is an Effective and Safe Second-Line Treatment Option for Recurrent Urinary Incontinence after Implantation of an AdVance/AdVance XP Fixed Male Sling. A Multicenter Cohort Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Fabian Queissert ◽  
Keith Rourke ◽  
Sandra Schönburg ◽  
Alessandro Giammò ◽  
Andreas Gonsior ◽  
...  

(1) Background: This study examined outcomes of second-line ATOMS implantation after failure of the fixed male sling (FMS) AdVance/AdVance XP. (2) Methods: A retrospective multicenter cohort analysis was carried out in men implanted with an ATOMS between 2011 and 2020 after failure of an AdVance/AdVance XP. Success was assessed on the basis of objective (dryness, 0–1 pad/24 h or >20 g/24 h pad test) and subjective results (PGI-I). We performed the Wilcoxon rank sum test, Fisher’s exact test, logistic regression, and multivariate analysis. (3) Results: The study included 88 patients from 9 centers with a mean age of 71.3 years. No Clavien–Dindo > II complications occurred within the first 3 months after ATOMS implantation. A total of 10 cases (9%) required revision in the ensuing clinical course. After a mean follow-up of 42.5 months, 76.1% achieved social continence, and 56.8% used no pads at all. Mean urine leakage/24 h dropped from 422 g (3.9 pads) to 38 g (0.69 pads) and the mean ICIQ-SF decreased from 16.25 to 5.3 (p < 0.0001). PROMs (patient-reported outcome measures) showed improvement in 98.9% of cases, and 63.6% gave a “very much better” PGI-I rating. Multivariate analysis identified a lower probability of achieving maximum satisfaction for the following factors: the AdVance XP as first-line therapy (OR 0.35), a lower ICIQ-SF question 1 (OR 0.26), status post-irradiation (OR 0.14), and more severe pain prior to ATOMS implantation (OR 0.51). (4) Conclusions: Implantation of an ATOMS is an effective and safe second-line treatment option for recurrent urinary incontinence after implantation of an AdVance/AdVance XP sling. High patient satisfaction was demonstrated in a long-term follow-up.

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
Dilara Akhoundova Sanoyan ◽  
Cäcilia S. Reiner ◽  
Panagiota Papageorgiou ◽  
Alexander R. Siebenhüner

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is typically diagnosed at an advanced or metastatic stage, when curative surgery is not recommended. Therefore, the prognosis is poor for this dismal disease, with only 1–2% of the patients reaching the 5-year survival follow-up. Current advances in systemic treatment with gemcitabine regimens, specifically polychemotherapy with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or other multidrug regimens such as FOLFIRINOX in the first line, have improved disease control over time. This higher efficacy of systemic treatment enables metastatic PDAC patients to receive second-line treatment more often nowadays. Currently, there is only one regimen for second-line treatment approved by the EMA, FDA, and Swissmedic, based on the phase III NAPOLI-1 study. In this case report, we present an outstanding response to sequential treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel followed by second-line treatment with nal-irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 51-51
Author(s):  
Xiaoyun Pan ◽  
Lincy S. Lal ◽  
John White ◽  
Seyed Hamidreza Mahmoudpour ◽  
Christian Valencia

51 Background: In 2021, 14,480 patients are estimated to be diagnosed with cervical cancer in the US; 16% of patients are expected to have metastatic disease for whom the 5-year survival rate is 17.6% per SEER estimates. Patients with metastatic cervical cancer (mCC) are treated mainly with systemic therapy. This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics, demographics, treatment patterns, and economic burden of patients with mCC receiving systemic therapy. Methods: Eligible women had been diagnosed with cervical cancer, as evidenced by >2 outpatient or >1 inpatient claim in the Optum Research Database from January 2014 through January 2020. Patients were included if they had metastasis within 6 months before or after cervical cancer diagnosis, with evidence of systemic treatment on or after the latter of a claim date for cervical cancer disease or metastatic disease. The index date was the first-line treatment initiation date. Patients were required to have ≥6 months of pre-index continuous enrollment. The top 3 treatment regimens and median treatment duration by line of therapy were described. All-cause per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs (2019 US dollars), including plan and patient paid amounts, were reported for full follow-up period from first-line and second-line therapy initiation. Results: The study sample consisted of 778 patients (mean age, 59 years; commercial, 58%; Medicare Advantage, 42%). The mean (median) follow-up period was 14 (9) months. Top baseline comorbidities were diseases of the urinary system (71%) and diseases of the female genital organs (70%), and the median Charlson comorbidity index was 7. In the first line, 80% of patients received platinum-based therapy and 23% received bevacizumab (bev). Of 778 patients, only 294 (38%) received second-line therapy, with 34% receiving bev. Top first-line treatment regimens were carboplatin + paclitaxel (27%), cisplatin (21%), and bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (10%); the median (95% CI) duration of treatment was 3.4 (3.1-3.7) months. Top second-line treatment regimens were bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (13%), carboplatin + paclitaxel (11%), and pembrolizumab (6%); the median duration of treatment was 3.8 (3.1-4.2) months. Mean all-cause total PPPM costs were $19,519 from first-line and $22,660 second-line therapy initiation (table). Conclusions: This study indicates that real-world mCC patients have short treatment durations and significant economic burden with first-line and second-line therapy. Novel therapies associated with greater clinical benefits in patients with mCC may provide economic benefit.[Table: see text]


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9562-9562
Author(s):  
Julian Andres Marin-Acevedo ◽  
Bethany Withycombe ◽  
Youngchul Kim ◽  
Zeynep Eroglu ◽  
Joseph Markowitz ◽  
...  

9562 Background: Anti-PD1 (aPD1) monotherapy with cemiplimab-rwlc or pembrolizumab is now considered standard of care for first-line management of advanced CSCC not amenable to surgery or curative radiotherapy. Previously chemotherapy or anti-EGFR agents were commonly used for these patients albeit with modest efficacy and limited duration of response. In prospective evaluation, the overall response rate (ORR) to cetuximab was 28% with disease control rate (DCR) of 69% at 6 weeks. The efficacy of second-line treatment following primary or acquired resistance to aPD1 therapy is not known. We investigated the activity of cetuximab in patients who progressed on previous IO therapy. Methods: We performed a single institution retrospective review from 9/28/18 (US approval date of cemiplimab-rwlc for CSCC) through 11/30/20 of patients with locally advanced or metastatic CSCC who received cetuximab after prior IO therapy. We identified patients who received cetuximab either immediately following IO therapy (cohort A) or as a subsequent line not immediately following IO therapy (cohort B). Primary endpoint was ORR with secondary endpoints of DCR, survival and toxicity. Median follow-up and survival times were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Thirteen patients, median age 72 years (62-82), all Caucasian, and 11 males (85%) were included in this study. Eleven pts received cetuximab immediately post-IO progression; two had additional intervening therapy post-IO before receiving cetuximab. Three patients received concurrent radiotherapy (palliative or definitive) with cetuximab. The ORR to cetuximab was 54% (7/13) including 1 complete and 6 partial responses. The cumulative 6-month DCR was 77%. All responses were observed in cohort A; both patients in cohort B had progressive disease as best response. Six of 7 initial responses are ongoing, including 3 in whom cetuximab was discontinued. At a median follow-up of 9.1 months, the median PFS has not been reached for the entire cohort. There were no unanticipated toxicities to cetuximab with rash (77%) and hypomagnesemia (54%) being the most common adverse events. Conclusions: In advanced CSCC, cetuximab used immediately after progression on aPD1 therapy yields notably higher and durable overall response than previously reported in the pre-IO therapy era. If validated in a larger dataset, this should be the preferred therapy for second-line treatment in advanced CSCC. Further exploration into the mechanism of this high efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy post aPD1 therapy is warranted.


Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 3785
Author(s):  
Maria Gloria Mumolo ◽  
Francesco Rettura ◽  
Sara Melissari ◽  
Francesco Costa ◽  
Angelo Ricchiuti ◽  
...  

The gluten-free diet (GFD) has gained increasing popularity in recent years, supported by marketing campaigns, media messages and social networks. Nevertheless, real knowledge of gluten and GF-related implications for health is still poor among the general population. The GFD has also been suggested for non-celiac gluten/wheat sensitivity (NCG/WS), a clinical entity characterized by intestinal and extraintestinal symptoms induced by gluten ingestion in the absence of celiac disease (CD) or wheat allergy (WA). NCG/WS should be regarded as an “umbrella term” including a variety of different conditions where gluten is likely not the only factor responsible for triggering symptoms. Other compounds aside from gluten may be involved in the pathogenesis of NCG/WS. These include fructans, which are part of fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs), amylase trypsin inhibitors (ATIs), wheat germ agglutinin (WGA) and glyphosate. The GFD might be an appropriate dietary approach for patients with self-reported gluten/wheat-dependent symptoms. A low-FODMAP diet (LFD) should be the first dietary option for patients referring symptoms more related to FODMAPs than gluten/wheat and the second-line treatment for those with self-reported gluten/wheat-related symptoms not responding to the GFD. A personalized approach, regular follow-up and the help of a skilled dietician are mandatory.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3780-3780 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Valentin Garcia-Gutierrez ◽  
Pilar Herrera ◽  
Lorena L Abalo ◽  
Maria Dolores Rey ◽  
Maria Calbacho ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3780 Background: Imatinib has shown an outstanding improvement in the prognosis of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients. Nevertheless, some of them have proven to be resistant or intolerant to imatinib. For these patients, second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are available. These drugs may be indicated in different circumstances as primary or second resistance, suboptimal responses or intolerance.The real benefits of second-generation TKIs as salvage treatment are surely in dependence with the indication in each case and are, therefore, difficult to evaluate. Second-generation TKIs are being evaluated as first line treatment compared to imatinib with quite favourable outcomes so long, but have not yet been compared with a strategy combining imatinib followed by second-generation TKIs for patients with previous unfavourable responses. Aims: Evaluate the real benefit of second-generation TKIs in second line treatment for CML patients regardless of the indication for its use. Study groups and methods: We have studied 98 patients treated with imatinib as first tyrosin kinase inhibitor (TKI) in our centre. These patients have been classified according whether second-generation TKIs were available or not. Group 1 includes 60 patients treated since 2001 to 2005, when the only salvage treatment was an increased imatinib dose, chemotherapy or allogenic stem cell transplantation. Group 2 includes 38 patients treated since 2005 until today. In the second group second-generation TKIs (dasatinib or nilotinib) were used according to the indications mentioned above. Follow up period was 39 months and 32 months for group 1 and 2 respectively. Sokal risk index was high in 14% and 16%; intermediate 42 % and 40%; and low in 44% and 44 % for group 1 and 2 respectively. Results: The use of second-generation TKIs as second line resulted in significant benefit to patients in terms of responses. Complete cytogenetic responses (CCR) at any time were achieved in 73% and 86% for patients in group 1 and 2 (p=.09). Probability of the achievement of mayor molecular responses (MMR) was 42% vs 71% for group 1 and 2 respectively [p=.009; ratio=0.3 (0.1–0.7)]. Response rates at the last follow up for group 1 and 2 were: MMR: 33% vs 62%; CCR: 68% vs 94% and failure 32% vs 6% (p=.008). Progression free survival (including all the patients who started treatment) was 88% vs 94% for group 1 and 2 respectively. We found no correlation among responses and some prognostic factors (Sokal index, mutations at the TK domain or imatinib plasma levels). Imatinib doses were increased in 21 patients (35%) in group 1 (reasons for increasing doses were failure in 14 patients and suboptimal responses in 7 patients). 10 patients (26%) in group 2 received second-line TKIs as second line treatment (4 because imatinib failure, 3 by suboptimal responses and 3 due to intolerance). Conclussions: The use of second-generation TKIs as salvage has improved the responses of CML patients treated with TKIs. Once the second-generation TKIs has shown benefit compared to imatinib in first line treatment, this therapeutic strategy should be compared vs the use of imatinib followed of second-line TKIs for patients without optimal responses to imatinib. Disclosures: Montalban: Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa en Cancer (RETICC): Research Funding; Asociación Española contra el Cancer: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 946-946 ◽  
Author(s):  
Girindra G Raval ◽  
Morie A Gertz ◽  
Martha Q Lacy ◽  
Suzanne R Hayman ◽  
Shaji K. Kumar ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 946 Background: The emerging therapies directed at the plasma cell clone have dramatically increased overall survival (OS) for both myeloma and amyloidosis patient populations. As more treatment trials are done in patients (pts) with AL, benchmarks for outcomes among previously treated AL pts are required, especially for those pts who are not candidates for high-dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Inadequate information is available about the number of non-transplant pts who go on to receive second line treatment for AL amyloidosis. Methods: To ascertain the outcomes of pts who did not receive ASCT as primary therapy but who required a second line of therapy, we reviewed the experience of pts seen at Mayo Rochester between 1990 and 2010 according to an IRB approved retrospective review protocol. 1828 pts had their first Mayo visit for AL during this time period. Pts were excluded from this study for the following reasons: 571 had upfront transplant; 907 pts had received only one line of treatment for their amyloid; 91 had longstanding other associated malignancy [Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (8), lymphoma (15), CLL (6), multiple myeloma (62)]; and 93 had inadequate follow-up information. One-hundred and sixty-six pts received 2 or more lines of therapy for their AL amyloid and are the subject of these analyses. Statistical analyses were done using JMP statistical software (SAS, Carey, NC). Results: Of the 166 pts, the median age was 64 years (range 34, 84). 49% were male. Baseline organ involvement was as follows: cardiac 84/166 (50%); renal 118/166 (71); liver 23/166 (13.8%); peripheral nerves 19/166 (11.4%); and gastrointestinal 14/166(8.4%). Thirty-one percent (52/16) had both cardiac and renal involvement. Only 73 pts had cardiac biomarkers (NT pro BNP and Troponin T) done at baseline. Of these pts, 26% were stage 1, 49.3% were stage 2, and 24.6% were stage 3 according to original Mayo cardiac biomarker staging system. By inclusion criteria definition, all 166 pts received 1st and 2nd line therapies; 53 (32%) pts received 3rd line of treatment; 20 (12%) received 4th line of treatment; and 10 (6%) received 5th line of treatment. For first line therapy, the most common drugs given either singly or in combination were corticosteroid (147/166; 88.5 %), alkylator (99/166; 59.6%), IMID (34/166; 20.4 %), and bortezomib (19/166; 11.4%). The median time from diagnosis to 2nd line therapy was 10.3 months. Second line regimens received included: corticosteroid, 108/166 (65.1%); alkylator, 76/166 (45.8 %); IMID, 46/166 (27.7%); and bortezomib, 46/166 (27.8%). The median time from diagnosis to 3rd line therapy was 19.8 months. For the 53 pts who received 3rd line treatment, regimens included: corticosteroid, 41/53 (77.3%); IMIDs, 17/53 (32.1%); alkylator, 17/53 (32.1%); bortezomib, 12/53 (22.6%). The median time from diagnosis to 4th line therapy was 31.8 months. For the 20 pts receiving 4th line treatment, regimens included: corticosteroids, 15/20(75%); alkylator, 12/20 (60%), bortezomib, 7/20 (35%); and IMIDs, 4/20(20%). Eighty-three pts have died. The 1 year mortality of our study population was only 8%. The median follow-up of surviving pts was 47.6 months. Figure 1 demonstrates Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival (OS) from initiation of each successive therapy. The median OS from initiation of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd lines of treatment were 65, 49.5 and 36.7 months respectively. The median OS after the 4th line of treatment was not reached. The 4 year OS rates from initiation of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines of therapy were 58%, 50.8 %, 50 % and 53.4% respectively. Conclusion: Outcomes among relapsed or refractory AL pts are better than what one might expect. Multiple publications have demonstrated that the 1 year mortality of newly diagnosed AL is in the vicinity of 40%. Thereafter, the rate at which pts die dramatically decreases. Our study provides explicit data characterizing the fate of pts unfortunate enough to require additional therapy but fortunate enough to survive past the exceedingly high risk period of death that occurs within 6–12 months of diagnosis. These data provide useful information for benchmarking future trials for treatments of AL amyloidosis. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4166-4166
Author(s):  
Anna Asklid ◽  
Agnes Mattsson ◽  
Einar Björgvinsson ◽  
Maria Winqvist ◽  
Sandra Eketorp Sylvan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Treatment of relapsed or refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) remains challenging. Major progress has been achieved with new agents such as ibrutinib and idelalisib. However relapses still occur with these agents or the treatment has to be withdrawn (Byrd et al, Blood 2015). Several new drugs have been or are currently tested in pivotal, non-controlled phase 2 trials on R/R CLL patients, with the majority of patients on 2nd line therapy following chemoimmunotherapy. Thus, reliable and matching historical data are required for comparison. We have previously reported on the outcome of heavily pretreated refractory patients (Eketorp Sylvan et al, Leuk Lymphoma 2014). The aim of the this study was to specifically investigate the outcome of 2nd line treatment prior to the access of small molecule-based treatment options, in consecutive patients from a well-defined geographical region, where almost complete follow-up exists and external referrals are minimal. Methods: Patients diagnosed with CLL were identified from the Cancer Registry in Stockholm (Nov 2002- Dec 2013) and patient files were reviewed individually to identify R/R patients. Efficacy and toxicity of 2nd line and later salvage therapies were recorded as well as long term follow-up. Patients were also grouped into treated in the early (Nov 2002-2007) and late time period (2008-2013) and compared regarding outcome. A multivariate cox proportional hazards model was perform to explore risk factors for outcome. Results: Chart review of 979 patients identified 148 consecutive, non-referred patients with R/R CLL undergoing various types of 2nd line salvage therapy. Median age was 73 years and 53% had Binet stage C. Del17p testing was available in 46% of patients of which 20.6% had del17p. Most frequently initiated treatments in 2nd line were chlorambucil (27.7%), FC (23.6%) and FCR (13.5%). The overall response rate (ORR) was 48.6% (3.4% CR). Median overall-survival (OS) from start of second line therapy was 37.9 months. Shorter OS was significantly associated with ECOG higher than 0, male sex, and age > 80 years. There was no difference in OS, PFS or ORR between those treated in the first vs the second time period of this study, despite that 2nd line use of chlorambucil decreased from 39% to 23% and use of FCR or BR increased from 0% to 26% from 2002-2007 to 2008-2013. However, median duration of response was significantly longer during the later time period (20.9 vs 10.3 months, p=0.035). During treatment, 50.7% of patients were hospitalized and 32.4% of patients experienced grade III-IV infections. Other AEs ≥ grade 3 occurred in 10.1% and 7.4% had bleeding events. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity, according to IWCLL-criteria, occurred in 0.7%/0.7% (Hb), 11.5%/8.8% (platelets) and 16.9%/36.5% (neutrophils). Toxicity was similar in both time periods. Conclusion: Our study describes the outcome of 2nd line treatment in R/R CLL in consecutive patients from a geographically well defined region with almost complete follow-up and without influence on the results from external referrals. Almost no improvement was observed in the outcome of 2nd line treatment during the 10 year period. Such real-world results may be used for comparison with data obtained in non-controlled phase 2 trials on new orphan drugs. Keywords: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia, Relapsed, Refractory, Clinical outcome Disclosures Asklid: Janssen Cilag: Research Funding. Mattsson:Janssen Cilag: Research Funding. Björgvinsson:Janssen Cilag: Research Funding. Winqvist:Janssen Cilag: Research Funding. Eketorp Sylvan:Janssen Cilag: Research Funding. Søltoft:Janssen Cilag: Employment. Repits:Janssen Cilag: Employment. Diels:Janssen: Employment. Österborg:Janssen Cilag: Research Funding. Hansson:Jansse Cilag: Research Funding.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9506-9506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Makoto Maemondo ◽  
Tatsuro Fukuhara ◽  
Haruhiro Saito ◽  
Naoki Furuya ◽  
Kana Watanabe ◽  
...  

9506 Background: In NEJ026, a phase III trial comparing bevacizumab plus erlotinib (BE) to erlotinib monotherapy (E) for EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we demonstrated the progression-free survival (PFS) of BE was significantly superior to E (Saito et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019 May;20(5):625-635.). However overall survival analysis were immature at the cutoff date. Methods: Chemotherapy-naïve pts with advanced non-squamous NSCLC harboring EGFR-mutation were randomly assigned to receive either combination with erlotinib (150 mg daily) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg iv q3w) or erlotinib (150 mg daily). The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints were OS, RR, safety, and QoL. Results: The 226 pts were assigned to BE (n=112) and E (n=114). For the follow-up OS analysis, the data cut-off date was 30 November 2019. Median follow up time was 39.2 months. Median OS was 50.7 months (95% CI, 37.3 months to not reached) with BE and 46.2 months (95% CI, 38.2 months to not reached) with E (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.48). Twenty-nine patients (25.9%) in BE and twenty-six patients (23.2%) in E were treated by osimertinib as second line treatment. The median survival time between enrollment and progressive disease of second-line treatment (median PFS2) was 28.6 months (95% CI, 22.1 months to 35.9) with BE and 24.3 months (95% CI, 20.4 months to 29.1 months) with E (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.10). In both arms, the median OS of patients with osimertinib second-line treatment were longer than other second-line chemotherapy groups [50.7 months (95% CI, 38.0 months to 50.7 months) vs 40.1 months (95% CI, 29.5 months to not reached), (hazard ratio, 0.645; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.03), respectively. Conclusion: The additional effect of bevacizumab on erlotinib monotherapy for NSCLC with EGFR mutations gradually decreased in the order of PFS2 and survival, with no significant differences. Clinical trial information: UMIN000017069 .


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document