RESUMO
Surgery is the standard treatment for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma. Despite curative intent, patients with a high risk of relapse have a 5-year metastasis-free survival rate of only 30% and prevention of recurrence is an unmet need. In a Phase III trial (JAVELIN Renal 101), progression-free survival of axitinib + avelumab was superior to sunitinib with a favorable objective response rate and no added toxicity profiles as known for axitinib or avelumab single agent. NEOAVAX is designed as open label, single arm, Phase II trial with a Simon's two-stage design evaluating neoadjuvant axitinib + avelumab followed by complete surgical resection in 40 patients with high-risk nonmetastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Primary end point is remission of the primary tumor (RECIST 1.1; Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors) following neoadjuvant therapy. Secondary end points include disease-free survival, overall survival, rate of metastasis and local recurrence, safety, and tolerability. Exploratory end points include investigation of effects on neoangiogenesis, immune infiltrates and myeloid-derived suppressor cell components to support a rationale for the combined use of axitinib and avelumab (NCT03341845).
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais/administração & dosagem , Axitinibe/administração & dosagem , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Idoso , Anticorpos Monoclonais/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Axitinibe/efeitos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renais/patologia , Carcinoma de Células Renais/cirurgia , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Terapia Neoadjuvante , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Nefrectomia/efeitos adversos , Prevenção SecundáriaRESUMO
There is currently no consensus on the optimal treatment for patients with a primary diagnosis of clinically and pathologically node-positive (cN1M0 and pN1M0) hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (PCa). The treatment paradigm has shifted as research has shown that these patients could benefit from intensified treatment and are potentially curable. This scoping review provides an overview of available treatments for men with primary-diagnosed cN1M0 and pN1M0 PCa. A search was conducted on Medline for studies published between 2002 and 2022 that reported on treatment and outcomes among patients with cN1M0 and pN1M0 PCa. In total, twenty-seven eligible articles were included in this analysis: six randomised controlled trials, one systematic review, and twenty retrospective/observational studies. For cN1M0 PCa patients, the best-established treatment option is a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) applied to both the prostate and lymph nodes. Based on most recent studies, treatment intensification can be beneficial, but more randomised studies are needed. For pN1M0 PCa patients, adjuvant or early salvage treatments based on risk stratification determined by factors such as Gleason score, tumour stage, number of positive lymph nodes, and surgical margins appear to be the best-established treatment options. These treatments include close monitoring and adjuvant treatment with ADT and/or EBRT.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists can be improved. OBJECTIVE: To assess safety, the frequency and severity of hot flushes (HFs), bone health, and antitumor effects of high-dose estetrol (HDE4) when combined with ADT. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A phase II, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted in advanced prostate cancer patients requiring ADT (the PCombi study). INTERVENTION: Patients receiving LHRH agonist treatment were randomized 2:1 to 40 mg HDE4 (n = 41) or placebo (n = 21) cotreatment for 24 wk. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Coprimary endpoints were frequency/severity of HFs and levels of total and free testosterone (T). Secondary endpoints included assessments of bone metabolism (osteocalcin and type I collagen telopeptide [CTX1]), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH). Efficacy analysis was based on the selected per-protocol (PP) population. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 62 patients included in the study, 57 were suitable for a PP analysis (37 HDE4; 20 placebo). No E4-related serious cardiovascular adverse events occurred at 24 wk. Weekly HFs were reported by 13.5% of patients with HDE4 and 60.0% with placebo (p < 0.001). Daily HFs occurred in 5.9% versus 55%. Bone turnover parameters decreased significantly with HDE4 (p < 0.0001). Total and free T decreased earlier (p < 0.05), and free T was suppressed further (p < 0.05). PSA suppression was more profound and earlier (p < 0.005). FSH levels were suppressed by 98% versus 57% (p < 0.0001). Estrogenic side effects were nipple sensitivity (34%) and gynecomastia (17%). CONCLUSIONS: HDE4 cotreatment of ADT patients with advanced prostate cancer was well tolerated, and no treatment-related cardiovascular adverse events were observed at 24 wk. HFs and bone turnover were substantially reduced. Suppression of free T, PSA, and FSH was more rapid and profound, suggesting enhanced disease control by HDE4 cotreatment. Larger and longer-lasting studies are needed to confirm the results of the study reported here. PATIENT SUMMARY: Cotreatment of androgen deprivation therapy with high-dose estetrol in advanced prostate cancer patients results in fewer occurrences of hot flushes, bone protection, and other antitumor benefits. Nipple sensitivity and gynecomastia may occur as side effects.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Patient decision aids (PDAs) have been developed to help patients make an informed choice for a treatment option. Despite proven benefits, structural implementation falls short of expectations. The present study aims to assess the effectiveness and cost-utility of the PDA among newly diagnosed patients with localised prostate cancer and their partners, alongside implementation of the PDA in routine care. METHODS/ANALYSIS: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial will be conducted. The PDA will be sequentially implemented in 18 hospitals in the Netherlands, over a period of 24 months. Every 3 or 6 months, a new cluster of hospitals will switch from usual care to care including a PDA.The primary outcome measure is decisional conflict experienced by the patient. Secondary outcomes comprise the patient's quality of life, treatment preferences, role in the decision making, expectations of treatment, knowledge, need for supportive care and decision regret. Furthermore, societal cost-utility will be valued. Other outcome measures considered are the partner's treatment preferences, experienced participation to decision making, quality of life, communication between patient, partner and health care professional, and the effect of prostate cancer on the relationship, social contacts and their role as caregiver. Patients and partners receiving the PDA will also be asked about their satisfaction with the PDA.Baseline assessment takes place after the treatment choice and before the start of a treatment, with follow-up assessments at 3, 6 and 12 months following the end of treatment or the day after deciding on active surveillance. Outcome measures on implementation include the implementation rate (defined as the proportion of all eligible patients who will receive a PDA) and a questionnaire for health care professionals on determinants of implementing an innovation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be conducted in accordance with local laws and regulations of the Medical Ethics Committee of VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The results from this stepped-wedge trial will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register NTR TC5177, registration date: May 28th 2015.Pre-results.
Assuntos
Cuidadores/psicologia , Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Participação do Paciente , Neoplasias da Próstata/psicologia , Projetos de Pesquisa , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Custos e Análise de Custo , Tomada de Decisões , Feminino , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Países Baixos , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Qualidade de VidaRESUMO
The centrosome plays a key role in cancer invasion and metastasis. However, it is unclear how abnormal centrosome numbers are regulated when prostate cancer (PCa) cells become metastatic. CP110 was previously described for its contribution of centrosome amplification (CA) and early development of aggressive cell behaviour. However its regulation in metastatic cells remains unclear. Here we identified miR-129-3p as a novel metastatic microRNA. CP110 was identified as its target protein. In PCa cells that have metastatic capacity, CP110 expression was repressed by miR-129-3p. High miR-129-3p expression levels increased cell invasion, while increasing CP110 levels decreased cell invasion. Overexpression of CP110 in metastatic PCa cells resulted in a decrease in the number of metastasis. In tissues of PCa patients, low CP110 and high miR-129-3p expression levels correlated with metastasis, but not with the expression of genes related to EMT. Furthermore, overexpression of CP110 in metastatic PCa cells resulted in excessive-CA (E-CA), and a change in F-actin distribution which is in agreement with their reduced metastatic capacity. Our data demonstrate that miR-129-3p functions as a CA gatekeeper in metastatic PCa cells by maintaining pro-metastatic centrosome amplification (CA) and preventing anti-metastatic E-CA.
Assuntos
Proteínas de Ciclo Celular/biossíntese , Centrossomo/patologia , Regulação Neoplásica da Expressão Gênica/fisiologia , MicroRNAs/metabolismo , Proteínas Associadas aos Microtúbulos/biossíntese , Fosfoproteínas/biossíntese , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Animais , Linhagem Celular Tumoral , Humanos , Masculino , MicroRNAs/genética , Neoplasias da Próstata/genética , Neoplasias da Próstata/metabolismo , RatosRESUMO
Compartment syndrome, rhabdomyolysis and the risk of acute renal failure are potential complications of the lithotomy position. A six-year-old girl is described who developed a compartment syndrome with rhabdomyolysis after prolonged surgery in the lithotomy position. This complication occurred three times over ten years in our hospital. Rhabdomyolysis may induce acute renal failure. The pathogenesis of rhabdomyolysis--induced renal failure has not yet been elucidated. However, forced diuresis by intravenous administration of mannitol and furosemide can prevent acute renal failure.