SEOM-GG clinical guidelines for the management of germ-cell testicular cancer (2023).

Testicular germ cell tumors are the most common tumors in adolescent and young men. They are curable malignancies that should be treated with curative intent, minimizing acute and long-term side effects. Inguinal orchiectomy is the main diagnostic procedure, and is also curative for most localized tumors, while patients with unfavorable risk factors for recurrence, or those who are unable or unwilling to undergo close follow-up, may require adjuvant treatment. Patients with persistent markers after orchiectomy or advanced disease at diagnosis should be staged and classified according to the IGCCCG prognostic classification. BEP is the most recommended chemotherapy, but other schedules such as EP or VIP may be used to avoid bleomycin in some patients. Efforts should be made to avoid unnecessary delays and dose reductions wherever possible. Insufficient marker decline after each cycle is associated with poor prognosis. Management of residual masses after chemotherapy differs between patients with seminoma and non-seminoma tumors. Patients at high risk of relapse, those with refractory tumors, or those who relapse after chemotherapy should be managed by multidisciplinary teams in experienced centers. Salvage treatment for these patients includes conventional-dose chemotherapy (TIP) and/or high-dose chemotherapy, although the best regimen and strategy for each subgroup of patients is not yet well established. In late recurrences, early complete surgical resection should be performed when feasible. Given the high cure rate of TGCT, oncologists should work with patients to prevent and identify potential long-term side effects of the treatment. The above recommendations also apply to extragonadal retroperitoneal and mediastinal tumors.

SEOM SOGUG clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2022).

Renal cancer is the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. The aim of this article is to review the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of renal carcinoma accompanied by recommendations with new evidence and treatment algorithms. A new pathologic classification of RCC by the World Health Organization (WHO) was published in 2022 and this classification would be considered a "bridge" to a future molecular classification. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab is an option for intermediate-or high-risk cases, as well as patients after complete resection of metastatic disease. More data are needed in the future, including positive overall survival data. Clinical prognostic classification, preferably IMDC, should be used for treatment decision making in mRCC. Cytoreductive nephrectomy should not be deemed mandatory in individuals with intermediate-poor IMDC/MSKCC risk who require systemic therapy. Metastasectomy can be contemplated in selected subjects with a limited number of metastases or long metachronous disease-free interval. For the population of patients with metastatic ccRCC as a whole, the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, nivolumab-cabozantinib, or pembrolizumab-lenvatinib can be considered as the first option based on the benefit obtained in OS versus sunitinib. In cases that have an intermediate IMDC and poor prognosis, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has demonstrated superior OS compared to sunitinib. As for individuals with advanced RCC previously treated with one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, nivolumab and cabozantinib are the options of choice. When there is progression following initial immunotherapy-based treatment, we recommend treatment with an antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. While no clear sequence can be advocated, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in the setting of metastatic RC.

A phase II randomised trial of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in combination with docetaxel or docetaxel plus prednisone after disease progression to abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: The ABIDO-SOGUG trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of maintaining or withdrawing abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had experienced cancer progression to this treatment and were beginning a docetaxel-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Phase II, randomised, open-label study conducted in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. After open-label treatment with AAP, patients who had experienced cancer progression to AAP were randomised to 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus AAP or to receive 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus 10 mg of prednisone orally daily. The primary outcome was the radiographic progression-free survival rate at 12 months as evaluated by the investigators in all randomised patients. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients were included in open-label treatment with AAP, and of them, 94 patients were randomised to receive either docetaxel plus AAP (intervention group; n = 47) or docetaxel plus prednisone (control group; n = 47). The 12-month radiographic progression-free survival rates did not differ between the intervention group (34.9%; 95% CI 20.7-49.2) and the control group (33.9%; 95% CI 19.5-48.3). There were no significant differences in the time to radiographic progression and the overall survival between the intervention and control groups. Grade 3-5 neutropenia with the combination of docetaxel plus prednisone and AA was more frequent than with docetaxel plus prednisone (59.6% versus 27.7%). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the therapeutic strategy of maintaining AAP added to docetaxel in chemotherapy-naïve patients who have experienced cancer progression to AAP treatment should not be further evaluated and should be avoided in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIALS: NCT02036060 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02036060.

Wnt/ß-Catenin Signaling Contributes to Paclitaxel Resistance in Bladder Cancer Cells with Cancer Stem Cell-Like Properties.

The Wnt/ß-catenin pathway plays an important role in tumor progression and chemotherapy resistance and seems to be essential for the maintenance of cancer stem cells (CSC) in several tumor types. However, the interplay of these factors has not been fully addressed in bladder cancer. Here, our goal was to analyze the role of the Wnt/ß-catenin pathway in paclitaxel resistance and to study the therapeutic efficacy of its inhibition in bladder cancer cells, as well as to determine its influence in the maintenance of the CSC-like phenotype in bladder cancer. Our results show that paclitaxel-resistant HT1197 cells have hyperactivation of the Wnt/ß-catenin pathway and increased CSC-like properties compared with paclitaxel-sensitive 5637 cells. Paclitaxel sensitivity diminishes in 5637 cells after ß-catenin overexpression or when they are grown as tumorspheres, enriched for the CSC-like phenotype. Additionally, downregulation of ß-catenin or inhibition with XAV939 sensitizes HT1197 cells to paclitaxel. Moreover, a subset of muscle-invasive bladder carcinomas shows aberrant expression of ß-catenin that associates with positive expression of the CSC marker ALDH1A1. In conclusion, we demonstrate that Wnt/ß-catenin signaling contributes to paclitaxel resistance in bladder cancer cells with CSC-like properties.

The Challenge of Managing Bladder Cancer and Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Review with Treatment Recommendations from the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG).

Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men and the ninth most common in women in the Western world. The management of bladder carcinoma requires a multidisciplinary approach. Optimal treatment depends on several factors, including histology, stage, patient status, and possible comorbidities. Here we review recent findings on the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma, advanced urothelial carcinoma, upper tract urothelial carcinoma, non-urothelial carcinoma, and urologic complications arising from the disease or treatment. In addition, we present the recommendations of the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group for the treatment of these diseases, based on a focused analysis of clinical management and the potential of current research, including recent findings on the potential benefit of immunotherapy. In recent years, whole-genome approaches have provided new predictive biomarkers and promising molecular targets that could lead to precision medicine in bladder cancer. Moreover, the involvement of other specialists in addition to urologists will ensure not only appropriate therapeutic decisions but also adequate follow-up for response evaluation and management of complications. It is crucial, however, to apply recent molecular findings and implement clinical guidelines as soon as possible in order to maximize therapeutic gains and improve patient prognosis.

PROREPAIR-B: A Prospective Cohort Study of the Impact of Germline DNA Repair Mutations on the Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Germline mutations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes are identified in a significant proportion of patients with metastatic prostate cancer, but the clinical implications of these genes remain unclear. This prospective multicenter cohort study evaluated the prevalence and effect of germline DDR (gDDR) mutations on metastatic castration-resistance prostate cancer (mCRPC) outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Unselected patients were enrolled at diagnosis of mCRPC and were screened for gDDR mutations in 107 genes. The primary aim was to assess the impact of ATM/BRCA1/BRCA2/ PALB2 germline mutations on cause-specific survival (CSS) from diagnosis of mCRPC. Secondary aims included the association of gDDR subgroups with response outcomes for mCRPC treatments. Combined progression-free survival from the first systemic therapy (PFS) until progression on the second systemic therapy (PFS2) was also explored. RESULTS: We identified 68 carriers (16.2%) of 419 eligible patients, including 14 with BRCA2, eight with ATM, four with BRCA1, and none with PALB2 mutations. The study did not reach its primary end point, because the difference in CSS between ATM/BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 carriers and noncarriers was not statistically significant (23.3 v 33.2 months; P = .264). CSS was halved in germline BRCA2 (g BRCA2) carriers (17.4 v 33.2 months; P = .027), and g BRCA2 mutations were identified as an independent prognostic factor for CCS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.11; P = .033). Significant interactions between g BRCA2 status and treatment type (androgen signaling inhibitor v taxane therapy) were observed (CSS adjusted P = .014; PFS2 adjusted P = .005). CSS (24.0 v 17.0 months) and PFS2 (18.9 v 8.6 months) were greater in g BRCA2 carriers treated in first line with abiraterone or enzalutamide compared with taxanes. Clinical outcomes did not differ by treatment type in noncarriers. CONCLUSION: g BRCA2 mutations have a deleterious impact on mCRPC outcomes that may be affected by the first line of treatment used. Determination of g BRCA2 status may be of assistance for the selection of the initial treatment in mCRPC. Nonetheless, confirmatory studies are required before these results can support a change in clinical practice.

Obatoclax and Paclitaxel Synergistically Induce Apoptosis and Overcome Paclitaxel Resistance in Urothelial Cancer Cells.

Paclitaxel is a treatment option for advanced or metastatic bladder cancer after the failure of first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine, although resistance limits its clinical benefits. Mcl-1 is an anti-apoptotic protein that promotes resistance to paclitaxel in different tumors. Obatoclax, a BH3 mimetic of the Bcl-2 family of proteins, antagonizes Mcl-1 and hence may reverse paclitaxel resistance in Mcl-1-overexpressing tumors. In this study, paclitaxel-sensitive 5637 and -resistant HT1197 bladder cancer cells were treated with paclitaxel, obatoclax, or combinations of both. Apoptosis, cell cycle, and autophagy were measured by Western blot, flow cytometry, and fluorescence microscopy. Moreover, Mcl-1 expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in bladder carcinoma tissues. Our results confirmed that paclitaxel alone induced Mcl-1 downregulation and apoptosis in 5637, but not in HT1197 cells; however, combinations of obatoclax and paclitaxel sensitized HT1197 cells to the treatment. In obatoclax-treated 5637 and obatoclax + paclitaxel-treated HT1197 cells, the blockade of the autophagic flux correlated with apoptosis and was associated with caspase-dependent cleavage of beclin-1. Obatoclax alone delayed the cell cycle in 5637, but not in HT1197 cells, whereas combinations of both retarded the cell cycle and reduced mitotic slippage. In conclusion, obatoclax sensitizes HT1197 cells to paclitaxel-induced apoptosis through the blockade of the autophagic flux and effects on the cell cycle. Furthermore, Mcl-1 is overexpressed in many invasive bladder carcinomas, and it is related to tumor progression, so Mcl-1 expression may be of predictive value in bladder cancer.

Radium-223 international early access program: results from the Spanish subset.

AIM: To report results from the Spanish subset included in the radium-223 international early access program (iEAP). PATIENTS & METHODS: Ninety patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases received radium-223 55 kBq/kg every 4 weeks for six cycles. RESULTS: The median time to disease progression was 8 months and to prostate-specific antigen progression was 4 months. The percentage of patients with ≥50% confirmed declines in prostate-specific antigen was 9%. The median overall survival was 14 months. Grade 3 or 4 treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 34% of patients (serious TEAEs 28%, TEAEs leading to discontinuation 27%). CONCLUSION: Outcomes of the Spanish subset are consistent with the iEAP. Radium-223 was generally well tolerated with no safety concerns.

Weekly cabazitaxel plus prednisone is effective and less toxic for 'unfit' metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Phase II Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) trial.

AIM: Cabazitaxel (CBZ), a novel tubulin-binding taxane, improves overall survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) that progresses during or after docetaxel treatment. We have designed a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CBZ as a weekly schedule for 'unfit' mCRPC patients after docetaxel failure. METHODS: In this single arm phase II study. CBZ was weekly administered in 1-hour infusion on days 1, 8, 15 and 22, every 5 weeks at 10 mg/m2 to eligible 'unfit' patients; oral prednisone (5 mg) was administered twice a day. Circulating tumour cells (CTCs) were also collected. New treatment scheme was considered effective if at least 65% of patients met a clinical benefit criteria based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-progression-free survival (PFS) values at week 12. RESULTS: Seventy patients (median age: 73.9 years) were enrolled; overall, 71.4% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) of 2; and 84%, 16% and 11% had bone, liver and lung metastases, respectively. Objective partial response or stable disease was achieved in 61% of patients, while PSA responses of ≥50% and ≥80% were observed in 34.8% and 10.6%, respectively. The median PSA-PFS was 4.8 months; and 68.6% of patients had no progression at week 12. The most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (2.8%), leukopenia (5.7%) and thrombocytopaenia (9%); no cases of febrile neutropenia were reported. Early CTC response was significantly correlated with PSA-PFS. CONCLUSIONS: CBZ/prednisone administered weekly to 'unfit' mCRPC patients appears to be as effective as classical standard 3-week scheme (TROPIC study) but with significantly lower toxicities and better tolerance. Early CTC response appears to be valuable as an early end-point of therapeutic efficacy.

Recent advances in genitourinary tumors: A review focused on biology and systemic treatment.

Updated information published up to 2016 regarding major advances in renal cancer, bladder cancer, and prostate cancer is here presented. Based on an ever better understanding of the genetic and molecular alterations that govern the initial pathogenic mechanisms of tumor oncogenesis, an improvement in the characterization and treatment of urologic tumors has been achieved in the past year. According to the Cancer Genome Atlas (ATLAS) project, alterations in the MET pathway are characteristics of type 1 papillary renal cell carcinomas, and activation of NRF2-ARE pathway is associated with the biologically distinct type 2. While sunitinib and pazopanib continue to be the standard first-line treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma of clear cell histology, nivolumab and cabozantinib are now the agents of choice in the second-line setting. In relation to urothelial bladder carcinoma, new potential molecular targets such as FGFR3, PI3K/AKT, RTK/RAS, CDKN2A, ARIDIA, ERBB2 have been identified. Response to adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy appears to be related to basal, luminal, and p53-like intrinsic subtypes. A phase II study with eribulin and a maintenance phase II trial with vinflunine have shown promising results. Similarly, the use of the check point inhibitors in advanced disease is likely to revolutionize the management of patients who have progressed after cisplatin-based chemotherapy. In prostate cancer, seven mutually exclusive molecular subtypes have been identified by the TCGA project. Chemotherapy has been consolidated as a key treatment for castration-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer, and abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel, and radium-223 remain standard therapeutic options for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. All this progress will undoubtedly contribute to the development of new treatments and therapeutic strategies that will improve the survival and quality of life of our patients.

Maintenance therapy with vinflunine plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with a response after first-line chemotherapy (MAJA; SOGUG 2011/02): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy improves outcomes in various tumour types, but cumulative toxic effects limit the choice of drugs. We investigated whether maintenance therapy with vinflunine would delay disease progression in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who had achieved disease control with first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial in 21 Spanish hospitals. Eligible patients had locally advanced, surgically unresectable, or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract, adequate organ function, and disease control after four to six cycles of cisplatin and gemcitabine (carboplatin allowed after cycle four). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive vinflunine or best supportive care until disease progression. We initially used block randomisation with a block size of six. Four lists were created for the two stratification factors of starting dose of vinflunine and presence of liver metastases. After a protocol amendment, number of cisplatin and gemcitabine cycles was added as a stratification factor, and eight lists were created, still with a block size of six. Finally, we changed to a minimisation procedure to reduce the risk of imbalance between groups. Vinflunine was given every 21 days as a 20 min intravenous infusion at 320 mg/m2 or at 280 mg/m2 in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1, age 75 years or older, previous pelvic radiotherapy, or creatinine clearance lower than 60 mL/min. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival longer than 5·3 months in the vinflunine group, assessed by modified intention to treat. Comparison of progression-free survival between treatment groups was a secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01529411. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2012, and Jan 29, 2015, we enrolled 88 patients, of whom 45 were assigned to receive vinflunine and 43 to receive best supportive care. One patient from the vinflunine group was lost to follow-up immediately after randomisation and was excluded from the analyses. One patient in the best supportive care group became ineligible for the study and did not receive treatment due to a delay in enrolment, but was included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 15·6 months (IQR 8·5-26·0), 29 (66%) of 44 patients in the vinflunine group had disease progression and 24 (55%) had died, compared with 36 (84%) of 43 patients with disease progression and 32 (74%) deaths in the best supportive care group. Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (95% CI 2·0-11·1) in the vinflunine group and 4·2 months (2·1-6·3) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 0·59, 95% CI 0·37-0·96, p=0·031). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (eight [18%] of 44 in the vinflunine group vs none of 42 in the best supportive care group), asthenia or fatigue (seven [16%] vs one [2%]), and constipation (six [14%] vs none). 18 serious adverse events were reported in the vinflunine group and 14 in the best supportive care group. One patient in the vinflunine group died from pneumonia that was deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with disease control after first-line chemotherapy, progression-free survival exceeded the acceptable threshold with vinflunine maintenance therapy. Moreover, progression-free survival was longer with vinflunine maintenance therapy than with best supportive care. Vinflunine maintenance had an acceptable safety profile. Further studies of the role of vinflunine are warranted. FUNDING: Pierre-Fabre Médicament.

Novel potential predictive markers of sunitinib outcomes in long-term responders versus primary refractory patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Several potential predictive markers of efficacy of targeted agents in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have been identified. Interindividual heterogeneity warrants further investigation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Multicenter, observational, retrospective study in patients with clear-cell mRCC treated with sunitinib. Patients were classified in two groups: long-term responders (LR) (progression-free survival (PFS)≥22 months and at least stable disease), and primary refractory (PR) (progressive disease within 3-months of sunitinib onset). Objectives were to compare baseline clinical factors in both populations and to correlate tumor expression of selected signaling pathways components with sunitinib PFS. RESULTS: 123 patients were analyzed (97 LR, 26 PR). In the LR cohort, overall response rate was 79% and median duration of best response was 30 months. Median PFS and overall survival were 43.2 (95% confidence intervals[CI]:37.2-49.3) and 63.5 months (95%CI:55.1-71.9), respectively. At baseline PR patients had a significantly lower proportion of nephrectomies, higher lactate dehydrogenase and platelets levels, lower hemoglobin, shorter time to and higher presence of metastases, and increased Fuhrman grade. Higher levels of HEYL, HEY and HES1 were observed in LR, although only HEYL discriminated populations significantly (AUC[ROC]=0.704; cut-off=34.85). Increased levels of hsa-miR-27b, hsa-miR-23b and hsa-miR-628-5p were also associated with prolonged survival. No statistical significant associations between hsa-miR-23b or hsa-miR-27b and the expression of c-Met were found. CONCLUSIONS: Certain mRCC patients treated with sunitinib achieve extremely long-term responses. Favorable baseline hematology values and longer time to metastasis may predict longer PFS. HEYL, hsa-miR-27b, hsa-miR-23b and hsa-miR-628-5p could be potentially used as biomarkers of sunitinib response.

Functional PTGS2 polymorphism-based models as novel predictive markers in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving first-line sunitinib.

Sunitinib is the currently standard treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Multiple candidate predictive biomarkers for sunitinib response have been evaluated but none of them has been implemented in the clinic yet. The aim of this study was to analyze single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes linked to mode of action of sunitinib and immune response as biomarkers for mRCC. This is a multicenter, prospective and observational study involving 20 hospitals. Seventy-five mRCC patients treated with sunitinib as first line were used to assess the impact of 63 SNPs in 31 candidate genes on clinical outcome. rs2243250 (IL4) and rs5275 (PTGS2) were found to be significantly associated with shorter cancer-specific survival (CSS). Moreover, allele C (rs5275) was associated with higher PTGS2 expression level confirming its functional role. Combination of rs5275 and rs7651265 or rs2243250 for progression free survival (PFS) or CSS, respectively, was a more valuable predictive biomarker remaining significant after correction for multiple testing. It is the first time that association of rs5275 with survival in mRCC patients is described. Two-SNP models containing this functional variant may serve as more predictive biomarkers for sunitinib and could suppose a clinically relevant tool to improve the mRCC patient management.

Loss of PKCδ Induces Prostate Cancer Resistance to Paclitaxel through Activation of Wnt/ß-Catenin Pathway and Mcl-1 Accumulation.

Prostate cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death among men in developed countries. Although castration therapy is initially effective, prostate cancers progress to hormone-refractory disease and in this case taxane-based chemotherapy is widely used. Castration-resistant prostate cancer cells often develop resistance to chemotherapy agents and the search for new therapeutic strategies is necessary. In this article, we demonstrate that PKCδ silencing favors mitotic arrest after paclitaxel treatment in PC3 and LNCaP cells; however, this is associated with resistance to paclitaxel-induced apoptosis. In prostate cancer cells, PKCδ seems to exert a proapoptotic role, acting as a negative regulator of the canonical Wnt/ß-catenin pathway. PKCδ silencing induces activation of Wnt/ß-catenin pathway and the expression of its target genes, including Aurora kinase A, which is involved in activation of Akt and both factors play a key role in GSK3ß inactivation and consequently in the stabilization of ß-catenin and antiapoptotic protein Mcl-1. We also show that combined treatments with paclitaxel and Wnt/ß-catenin or Akt inhibitors improve the apoptotic response to paclitaxel, even in the absence of PKCδ. Finally, we observe that high Gleason score prostate tumors lose PKCδ expression and this correlates with higher activation of ß-catenin, inactivation of GSK3ß, and higher levels of Aurora kinase A and Mcl-1 proteins. These findings suggest that targeting Wnt/ß-catenin or Akt pathways may increase the efficacy of taxane chemotherapy in advanced human prostate cancers that have lost PKCδ expression. Mol Cancer Ther; 15(7); 1713-25. ©2016 AACR.

SNPs associated with activity and toxicity of cabazitaxel in patients with advanced urothelial cell carcinoma.

AIM: We aimed to identify SNPs associated with cabazitaxel toxicity and response within a Phase II clinical trial using this compound in advanced transitional cell carcinoma after progression to a platinum-based regimen. PATIENTS & METHODS: Eleven SNPs in CYP3A4, CYP3A5, CYP2C8, ABCB1 and TUBB1 were genotyped in 45 patients. RESULTS: CYP3A5 rs776746 A allele was associated with protection against gastrointestinal toxicity (odds ratio: 0.06, 95% CI: 0.007-0.63, p = 0.018) and with reduced progression-free survival (hazard ratio: 5.1, 95% CI: 1.7-15.1, p = 0.0038, multivariable analysis). ABCB1 SNPs were associated with total number of grade 3-4 toxicity events (p-values of 0.009, 0.041 and 0.043, respectively). CONCLUSION: Polymorphisms in CYP3A5 and ABCB1 may define a subset of patients with different cabazitaxel toxicity and efficacy and therefore could be used as markers for treatment optimization.

Updated recommendations from the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent male urogenital malignancy. Approximately 30% of patients with prostate cancer will develop advanced disease. Androgen deprivation therapy achieves disease control in about 90% of these patients, but the majority of them will eventually develop progressive disease, a status called castration-resistant prostate carcinoma (CRPC). However, in recent years, several new therapy strategies, such as immunotherapy, hormonal manipulations, chemotherapy agents and some bone-targeted therapies, have demonstrated an improvement in terms of overall survival in controlled trials. In 2012, the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) published its recommendations for the treatment of patients with CRPC. Due to the recent appearance of important new data and the complexity of decision-making in this field, SOGUG herein provides updated recommendations for the treatment of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer cell response to paclitaxel is affected by abnormally expressed securin PTTG1.

PTTG1 protein, the human securin, has a central role in sister chromatid separation during mitosis, and its altered expression has been reported in many tumor types. Paclitaxel is a widely used chemotherapeutic drug, whose mechanism of action is related to its ability to arrest cells in mitosis and the subsequent induction of the intrinsic apoptotic pathway. By using two prostate cancer cell lines with different responses to paclitaxel treatment, we have identified two situations in which PTTG1 influences cell fate differentially. In slippage-prone PC3 cells, both PTTG1 downregulation and overexpression induce an increase in mitotic cells that is associated with diminished apoptosis after paclitaxel treatment. In LNCaP cells, however, PTTG1 downregulation prevents mitotic entry and, subsequently, inhibits mitosis-associated, paclitaxel-induced apoptosis. In contrast, PTTG1 overexpression induces an increase in mitotic cells and apoptosis after paclitaxel treatment. We have also identified a role for Mcl-1 protein in preventing apoptosis during mitosis in PC3 cells, as simultaneous PTTG1 and Mcl-1 silencing enhances mitosis-associated apoptosis after paclitaxel treatment. The finding that a more efficient mitotic arrest alone in PC3 cells is not enough to increase apoptosis was also confirmed with the observation that a selected paclitaxel-resistant PC3 cell line showed an apoptosis-resistant phenotype associated with increased mitosis upon paclitaxel treatment. These findings could contribute to identify putative responsive and nonresponsive cells and help us to approach incomplete responses to paclitaxel in the clinical setting.

Cabazitaxel for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: safety data from the Spanish expanded access program.

BACKGROUND: Based on the TROPIC study results, cabazitaxel was approved for the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing on or after docetaxel. METHODS: This multi-centre program provided early access to cabazitaxel to patients with mCRPC before its commercialization. Safety data from 153 Spanish patients receiving cabazitaxel 25 mg/m(2) i.v. Q3W, plus oral prednisone/prednisolone 10 mg daily, are reported. RESULTS: Median age of patients was 70 years (26.8% ≥ 75 years), 94.1 and 26.8% had bone and visceral metastasis, respectively. Most had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ≤ 1 (88.9%) and had received a median of 8.0 cycles of last docetaxel treatment. The median of cabazitaxel cycles and cumulative dose were 6.0 (Interquartile range [IQR]: 4.0; 8.0) and 148.9 (IQR: 98.2; 201.4) mg/m(2), respectively. Adverse events (AEs) possibly related to cabazitaxel occurred in 143 (93.5%) patients. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 AEs were neutropenia (n = 25, 16.3%) and asthenia (n = 17, 11.1%). Febrile neutropenia and grade ≥ 3 diarrhea occurred in 5.2% of the patients each. There were five (3.3%) possibly treatment-related deaths, mainly infection-related. G-CSFs were used in 114 (74.5%) patients, generally as prophylaxis (n = 107; 69.9%). Grade ≥ 3 peripheral neuropathy and nail disorders were uncommon. CONCLUSIONS: Cabazitaxel administration, in a real-world setting, is tolerated by Spanish patients with mCRPC, and the AEs are manageable.

Management of adverse events of targeted therapies in normal and special patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Treatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have evolved very rapidly, as reflected by the approval of the many drugs that have shown efficacy in phase III studies. Approved drugs include tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) such as sunitinib, sorafenib and pazopanib, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors such as bevacizumab, and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors such as temsirolimus and everolimus. These biological agents have toxicity profiles that differ from those accompanying current chemotherapeutic agents, but their novelty leads to a lack of exhaustive clinical data regarding related adverse events (AEs), whose symptoms may overlap with those of the chronic illnesses of patients with mRCC such as hypertension, hyperglycemia, and pneumonitis. Hypertension, hypothyroidism, hand-foot syndrome, and fatigue are AEs frequently associated with TKIs; whereas immunosuppression, stomatitis, metabolic alterations, and non-infectious pneumonitis are AEs of mTOR inhibitors. Recommendations for treating these adverse events in patients with mRCC are usually the same as those for the general population. Mild to moderate toxicities may be managed with supportive and pharmacologic interventions, but higher-grade toxicities usually require external specialist consultation, dose reductions, and treatment interruption or discontinuation. Some groups of patients with mRCC, such as frail, elderly patients, and patients with renal or liver dysfunction, require special management of AEs.