RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The taxanes docetaxel and cabazitaxel prolong overall survival for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), with cabazitaxel approved in the postdocetaxel setting only. Recent data suggest they have similar efficacy but a different safety profile in the first-line mCRPC setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess patient preference between docetaxel and cabazitaxel among men who received one or more doses of each taxane and did not experience progression after the first taxane. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRPC were randomized 1:1 to receive docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 wk × 4 cycles) followed by cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2 every 3 wk × 4 cycles) or the reverse sequence. Randomization was stratified by prior abiraterone or enzalutamide use. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was patient preference, assessed via a dedicated questionnaire after the second taxane. Secondary endpoints included reasons for patient preference, prostate-specific antigen response, radiological progression-free survival, and overall survival. This clinical trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02044354. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 195 men randomized, 152 met the prespecified modified intent-to-treat criteria for analysis. Overall, 66 patients (43%) preferred cabazitaxel, 40 (27%) preferred docetaxel, and 46 (30%) had no preference (p = 0.004, adjusted for treatment period effect). More patients preferred treatment period 1 (43%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 36-52%) versus period 2 (27%, 95% CI 20-34%). Patient preference for cabazitaxel was mainly related to less fatigue (72%), better quality of life (64%), and other adverse events (hair loss, pain, nail disorders, edema). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of each drug. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly higher proportion of chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC who received both taxanes preferred cabazitaxel over docetaxel. Less fatigue and better quality of life were the two main reasons driving patient choice. PATIENT SUMMARY: Men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer preferred cabazitaxel over docetaxel for chemotherapy, mainly because of less fatigue and better quality of life.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Docetaxel/uso terapêutico , Fadiga/induzido quimicamente , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Preferência do Paciente , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Qualidade de Vida , Taxoides/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
The rapalogs everolimus and temsirolimus that inhibit mTOR signaling are used as antiproliferative drugs in several cancers. Here we investigated the influence of rapalogs-mediated immune modulation on their antitumor efficacy. Studies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients showed that everolimus promoted high expansion of FoxP3 (+)Helios(+)Ki67(+) regulatory CD4 T cells (Tregs). In these patients, rapalogs strongly enhanced the suppressive functions of Tregs, mainly in a contact-dependent manner. Paradoxically, a concurrent activation of spontaneous tumor-specific Th1 immunity also occurred. Furthermore, a high rate of Eomes(+)CD8(+) T cells was detected in patients after a long-term mTOR inhibition. We found that early changes in the Tregs/antitumor Th1 balance can differentially shape the treatment efficacy. Patients presenting a shift toward decreased Tregs levels and high expansion of antitumor Th1 cells showed better clinical responses. Studies conducted in tumor-bearing mice confirmed the deleterious effect of rapalogs-induced Tregs via a mechanism involving the inhibition of antitumor T-cell immunity. Consequently, the combination of temsirolimus plus CCR4 antagonist, a receptor highly expressed on rapalogs-exposed Tregs, was more effective than monotherapy. Altogether, our results describe for the first time a dual impact of host adaptive antitumor T-cell immunity on the clinical effectiveness of rapalogs and prompt their association with immunotherapies. Cancer Res; 76(14); 4100-12. ©2016 AACR.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Renais/imunologia , Everolimo/farmacologia , Imunossupressores/farmacologia , Neoplasias Renais/imunologia , Linfócitos T/efeitos dos fármacos , Animais , Linhagem Celular Tumoral , Feminino , Humanos , Interferon gama/biossíntese , Interleucina-2/biossíntese , Camundongos , Camundongos Endogâmicos BALB C , Camundongos Endogâmicos C57BL , Linfócitos T/imunologia , Serina-Treonina Quinases TOR/antagonistas & inibidores , Telomerase/imunologia , Células Th1/imunologiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Pain management is a major public health problem, especially in oncology. In order to assess professional practice, the IRFC-FC conducted a survey amongst patients with metastatic osteophilic solid tumor in Franche-Comté. The aims were to assess the pain prevalence, and its characteristics, its management and its impact on patients' quality of life in patients in pain. METHODS: An observational, prospective and multicenter survey was conducted using a self-report questionnaire. Patients with metastatic breast or prostate cancer managed in 5 day-hospitals of the IRFC-FC over a period of three months were included. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-three questionnaires were analyzed. Pain prevalence rate was 48.5%. Three quarters of patients in pain had chronic background pain, moderate to severe, with or without breakthrough pain. Considering their pain intensity and their analgesic therapy, 42.0% of patients seem to have an inadequate treatment. Eighty-five percent of treated patients reported to be compliant and felt that their pain was well managed despite a strong impact on their quality of life. CONCLUSION: The setting of a specific clinical pathway is essential to secure the standardized, optimal and efficient management of patients in pain. The assessment of patient satisfaction and quality of life must be integrated in clinical practice to identify patients in pain for which the treatment is inappropriate.