Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Second-line treatment in renal cell carcinoma: clinical experience and decision making.
Guadalupi, Valentina; Cartenì, Giacomo; Iacovelli, Roberto; Porta, Camillo; Pappagallo, Giovanni; Ricotta, Riccardo; Procopio, Giuseppe.
Afiliación
  • Guadalupi V; Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori IRCCS Milano, Milano, Lombardia 20133, Italy.
  • Cartenì G; Responsible for Research and Development Kerubin Digital Therapeutic, Italy.
  • Iacovelli R; Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS Roma, Lazio, Italy.
  • Porta C; Chair of Oncology Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology University of Bari 'A. Moro' and Division of Oncology AOU Consorziale Policlinico di Bari Bari, Italy.
  • Pappagallo G; Clinical Epidemiologist, Silea (TV), Italy.
  • Ricotta R; RCCS MultiMedica Sesto San Giovanni (MI), Sesto San Giovanni, Lombardia, Italy.
  • Procopio G; Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori IRCCS Milano, Milano, Lombardia, Italy.
Ther Adv Urol ; 13: 17562872211022870, 2021.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34211586
Currently, conventional treatments for metastatic RCC (mRCC) include immune-based combination regimens and/or targeted therapies, the latter mainly acting on angiogenesis, a key element of the process of tumor growth and spread. Although these agents proved able to improve patients' outcomes, drug resistance and disease progression are still experienced by a substantial number of VEGFR-TKIs-treated mRCC patients. Following the inhibition of the VEGF/VEGFRs axis, two strategies have emerged: either specifically targeting resistance pathways, at the same time continuing to inhibit angiogenesis, or using a completely different approach aimed at re-activating the immune system through the use of inhibitors of specific negative immune checkpoints. These two approaches, practically represented by the use of either cabozantinib or nivolumab, seem to remain a rational therapeutic approach also when first-line immune-based combinations are used. The objective of this study is to design a preferential therapeutic pathway for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The procedure applied in this project was a group discussion, based on the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) method in a meeting session, aimed at defining the therapeutic choice for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The NGT process defined the most relevant parameters that, according to the interviewed panelists, clinicians should consider for the selection of the second-line therapy in the context of advanced renal cell carcinoma of mRCC. The algorithm developed for the treatment selection as a result of this process should thus be considered by clinicians as reference for therapy selection. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The result of this paper was the definition of an algorithm intended to suggest a preferential therapeutic pathway considering both the outputs of the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) process and the actual clinical practice and the experience of selected panelists. During the NGT process and the discussion phase, panelists defined the most important parameters to be included in the algorithm that are important for the treatment definition. Cabozantinib and nivolumab are identified as the most reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after first-line treatment and are the medication options included in the algorithm for therapy selection.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Ther Adv Urol Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Ther Adv Urol Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia