Analysis of point mutation in exon 2 of CYP2E1 gene in renal cell/urothelial cancer patients in comparison with control population

2000 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 30-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Farker ◽  
M.H. Lehmann ◽  
R. Kästner ◽  
J. Weber ◽  
V. Janitzky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Point Mutation ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Urothelial Cancer ◽  
Control Population ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Cyp2e1 Gene

Impact of CYP2E1 genotype in renal cell and urothelial cancer patients

1998 ◽  
Vol 50 (4-6) ◽  
pp. 425-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Farker ◽  
M.H. Lehmann ◽  
B. Oelschlägel ◽  
J. Haerting ◽  
A. Hoffmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Urothelial Cancer

Comparison of efficacy and safety of checkpoint inhibitors in patients with genitourinary cancers aged below and above 75 years.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16101-e16101
Author(s):  
Gerald Bastian Schulz ◽  
Bernadett Szabados ◽  
Annabel Spek ◽  
Michael D. Staehler ◽  
Christian Stief ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Urothelial Cancer ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Genitourinary Cancers ◽  
Grade 3

e16101 Background: Checkpoint-inhibitors have recently been introduced in the treatment of patients with genitourinary cancers. However, the use in elderly patients is controversial due to putative age-associated changes including the dysregulation of the immune system. We sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of immunotherapy in patients younger and older than 75 years of age. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients with renal cell carcinoma and urothelial cancer treated with different immunotherapeutic agents between August 2015 and September 2018 at a high-volume single institution. Eligible patients received at least one cycle of single agent or a combination of checkpoint inhibitors as first or following treatment line. Immune-related adverse events (irAE) were graded using the NCI CTCAE v 4.0. Clinicopathological parameters including gender, cancer entity, ECOG, adverse events, comorbidities and response to treatment were stratified by age ≥ 75 vs. < 75 years and tested with a Pearson's chi-squared test. Additionally, we evaluated the impact of irAE on oncological outcome using the log-rank test. Results: 79 patients were identified, of those 27 (34.2%) were 75 years and older (15 renal cell carcinoma and 12 urothelial cancer patients) and 52 (65.8%) were younger than 75 years (39 renal cell carcinoma and 13 urothelial cancer patients). 2 complete responses were achieved in the elderly group and 6 in the younger group (p = 0.56). Disease control rate (stable disease, partial and complete response) was 48,1% in the elderly group and 53.8% in the younger group (p = 0.631). We observed a total of 30 irAEs (18 grade 1-2 and 12 grade 3-4), with an even distribution among the groups (≥75 years: 1 grade 4 AE; < 75 years: 12 grade 3-4 AEs). Except for ECOG ≥2 (p = 0.009) and ≥2 comorbidities (p < 0.001), there was no difference when groups were stratified by age. Both disease control rate and irAE did not differ between age subgroups. Occurrence of irAE showed no impact on oncological survival. Conclusions: The study demonstrates that patients over 75 years of age with renal cell and urothelial cancer treated with checkpoint-inhibitors respond with a good toxicity profile and an efficacy comparable with the younger population. irAE seem to have no impact on prognosis.

361: Serum Levels of Angiogenin and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Predict Metastatic Disease in Renal Cell Cancer Patients

2005 ◽  
Vol 173 (4S) ◽  
pp. 99-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Horstmann ◽  
Axel S. Merseburger ◽  
Markus A. Kuczyk ◽  
Arnulf Stenzl ◽  
Karl-Horst Bichler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
Growth Factor ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Disease ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Serum Levels ◽  
Vascular Endothelial ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor

Toxicities of axitinib, sunitinib and temsirolimus: implications for progression-free and overall survival in metastatic renal cell cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annemarie Uhlig ◽  
Johannes Uhlig ◽  
Lutz Trojan ◽  
Michael Woike ◽  
Marianne Leitsmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Skin Reaction ◽  
Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Hand Foot Skin Reaction

The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between axitinib, sunitinib and temsirolimus toxicities and patient survival in metastatic renal cell cancer patients. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of metastatic renal cell cancer patients from the prospective multicenter STAR-TOR study were assessed using multivariable Cox models. A total of 1195 patients were included (n = 149 axitinib; n = 546 sunitinib; n = 500 temsirolimus). The following toxicities significantly predicted outcomes: hand–foot skin reaction (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.29) for PFS with axitinib; stomatitis (HR = 0.62) and pneumonitis (HR = 0.23) for PFS with temsirolimus; stomatitis (HR = 0.52) and thrombocytopenia (HR = 0.6) for OS with temsirolimus; fatigue (HR = 0.71) for PFS with sunitinib; hand–foot skin reaction (HR = 0.56) and fatigue (HR = 0.58) for OS with sunitinib. In conclusion, in metastatic renal cell cancer, axitinib, sunitinib and temsirolimus demonstrate specific toxicities that are protective OS/PFS predictors.

An Italian, multicenter, real-world, retrospective study of first-line pazopanib in unselected metastatic renal-cell carcinoma patients: the ‘Pamerit’ study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Mosca ◽  
Ugo De Giorgi ◽  
Giuseppe Procopio ◽  
Umberto Basso ◽  
Giacomo Cartenì ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

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 &lt; 0.001), ECOG PS 0 (P &lt; 0.001), age (&lt;75 years, P = 0.005), surgery (P &lt; 0.001) and response to pazopanib (P &lt; 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.

Serum ICAM-1 in renal cell cancer patients: Possible significance for presence of metastatic disease

1997 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-34
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Vladimir Bilim ◽  
Tomoyuki Imai ◽  
Masayuki Takeda ◽  
Kota Tahahashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Disease ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Cell Cancer

scholarly journals Immunomodulatory effects of intravenous BIS-1 F(ab')2 administration in renal cell cancer patients

1995 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 795-799 ◽  
Author(s):  
RAJ Janssen ◽  
BJ Kroesen ◽  
J Buter ◽  
G Mesander ◽  
DT Sleijfer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Immunomodulatory Effects

scholarly journals KRAS and NRAS mutational gene profile of metastatic colorectal cancer patients in Jordan: Molecular spectrum, frequency and distribution pattern

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Awidi ◽  
Nidaa Ababneh ◽  
Maha Shomaf ◽  
Feras Al Fararjeh ◽  
Laila Owaidi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Distribution Pattern ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Molecular Spectrum ◽  
Kras Mutations ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Ras Mutations ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients ◽  
Kras Exon

Abstract Background A constitutively active RAS protein in the absence of stimulation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is the result of mutations in KRAS and NRAS genes. Mutations in the KRAS exon 2 and outside exon 2 have been found to predict the resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal therapy. A substantial proportion of metastatic colorectal cancer cases (mCRC) exhibit RAS mutations outside KRAS exon 2, particularly in KRAS exon 3 and 4 and NRAS exons 2, 3. No data about RAS mutations outside KRAS exon 2 are available for Jordanian patients with mCRC. We aim to study the molecular spectrum, frequency, and distribution pattern of KRAS and NRAS mutations in Jordanian patients with mCRC. Methods A cohort of 190 Jordanian metastatic colorectal cancer patients were enrolled in the trial. We detected mutations in exon 2 of the KRAS and NRAS gene as well as mutations outside of exon 2 using the StripAssay technique. The KRAS StripAssay covered 29 mutations and 22 NRAS mutations. Results Mutations were observed in 92 (48.42%) cases, and KRAS exon 2 accounted for 76 cases (83.69%). KRAS G12D was the most common mutation, occurring in 18 cases, followed by KRAS G12A in 16 cases, and G12T in 13 cases. Mutations outside of KRAS exon 2 represented 16.3% of the mutated cases. Among those, 6 cases (6.48%) carried mutations in NRAS exon 2, 3 and 10 cases (10.87%) in KRAS exon 3 and 4. Conclusion The frequency of NRAS and KRAS mutations outside of exon 2 appears to be higher in Jordanian patients in comparison with patients from western countries. KRAS mutations outside of exon 2 should be tested routinely to identify patients who should not be treated with anti-EGFR antibodies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document