Reasonability of Frequent Laboratory Analyses during Therapy with Nivolumab and Nivolumab+Ipilimumab in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma during the Phase 2 Clinical Trial TITAN-RCC.

In clinical trials, laboratory values are assessed with high frequency. This can be stressful for patients, resource intensive, and difficult to implement, for example in office-based settings. In the prospective, multicentre phase 2 TITAN-RCC trial (NCT02917772), we investigated how many relevant changes in laboratory values would have been missed if laboratory values had been assessed less frequently. Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (n = 207) received a response-based approach with nivolumab and nivolumab+ipilimumab boosts for non-response. We simulated that laboratory values were obtained before every second dose instead of every dose of the study drug(s). We assessed elevated leukocyte counts, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, bilirubin, creatinine, amylase, lipase, and thyroid-stimulating hormone. Dose delay and discontinuation criteria were defined according to the study protocol. With the reduced frequency of laboratory analyses, dose delay criteria were rarely missed: in a maximum of <0.1% (3/4382) of assessments (1% [2/207] of patients) during nivolumab monotherapy and in a maximum of 0.2% (1/465) of assessments (1% [1/132] of patients) during nivolumab+ipilimumab boosts. An exception was lipase-related dose delay which would have been missed in 0.6% (25/4204) of assessments (7% [15/207] of patients) during nivolumab monotherapy and in 0.8% (4/480) of assessments (3% [4/134] of patients) during nivolumab+ipilimumab boosts, but would have required the presence of symptoms. Discontinuation criteria would have only been missed for amylase (<0.1% [1/3965] of assessments [0.5% (1/207) of patients] during nivolumab monotherapy, none during nivolumab+ipilimumab boosts) and lipase (0.1% [5/4204] of assessments [2% (4/207) of patients] during nivolumab monotherapy; 0.2% [1/480] of assessments [0.7% (1/134) of patients] during nivolumab+ipilimumab boosts). However, only symptomatic patients would have had to discontinue treatment due to amylase or lipase laboratory values. In conclusion, a reduced frequency of laboratory testing appears to be acceptable in asymptomatic patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab or nivolumab+ipilimumab.

Nivolumab + Ipilimumab as Immunotherapeutic Boost in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Studies with nivolumab, an approved therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) after platinum-based chemotherapy, demonstrate improved outcomes with added high-dose ipilimumab. Objective: To assess efficacy and safety of a tailored approach using nivolumab + ipilimumab as an immunotherapeutic boost for mUC. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this phase 2 nonrandomized trial, patients with mUC composed 2 cohorts. Cohort 1 received first-line or second-/third-line nivolumab with escalating doses of ipilimumab, and cohort 2 received second-/third-line nivolumab with high-dose ipilimumab. Recruitment spanned 26 sites in Germany and Austria from August 8, 2017, to February 18, 2021. All patients had a 70% or higher Karnofsky Performance Score and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1. Interventions: All patients initiated 4 doses of 240-mg nivolumab (1× every 2 wk). Week 8 nonresponders received nivolumab + ipilimumab (1× every 3 wk). Cohort 1 received 2 doses of 3-mg/kg nivolumab + 1-mg/kg ipilimumab followed by 2 doses of 1-mg/kg nivolumab + 3-mg/kg ipilimumab if no response. Due to safety concerns, cohort 1 treatment was halted, and first-line cohort 2 treatment was not pursued. Cohort 2 received 2 to 4 doses of 1-mg/kg nivolumab + 3-mg/kg ipilimumab. Responders continued with nivolumab maintenance but could receive nivolumab + ipilimumab for later progression. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was objective response rate. Results: The study comprised 169 patients (118 [69.8%] men; median [range] age, 68 [37-84] years): 86 in cohort 1 (42 first-line; 44 second-/third-line) and 83 in cohort 2. The median (IQR) follow-up times were 10.4 (4.2-23.5) months (first-line cohort 1), 7.5 (3.1-23.8) months (second-/third-line cohort 1), and 6.2 (3.2-22.7) months (cohort 2). Response rates to nivolumab induction were 12/42 (29%, first-line cohort 1), 10/44 (23%, second-/third-line cohort 1), and 17/83 (20%, cohort 2). Response rates to a tailored approach were 20/42 (48% [90% CI, 34%-61%], first-line cohort 1), 12/44 (27% [90% CI, 17%-40%], second-/third-line cohort 1), and 27/83 (33% [90% CI, 23%-42%], cohort 2). Three-year overall survival rates for first-line cohort 1, second-/third-line cohort 1, and cohort 2 using the Kaplan-Meier method were 32% (95% CI, 17%-49%), 19% (95% CI, 8%-33%), and 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this nonrandomized trial, although first-line cohort 1 treatment improved objective response rates, considerable progression events urge caution with this as a first-line therapy. Second-/third-line cohort 1 treatment did not improve response rates compared with nivolumab monotherapy. However, added high-dose ipilimumab may improve tumor response and survival in patients with mUC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03219775.

Rescue Allocation Modes in Eurotransplant Kidney Transplantation: Recipient Oriented Extended Allocation Versus Competitive Rescue Allocation-A Retrospective Multicenter Outcome Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whenever the kidney standard allocation (SA) algorithms according to the Eurotransplant (ET) Kidney Allocation System or the Eurotransplant Senior Program fail, rescue allocation (RA) is initiated. There are 2 procedurally different modes of RA: recipient oriented extended allocation (REAL) and competitive rescue allocation (CRA). The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of patient survival and graft failure with RA mode and whether or not it varied across the different ET countries. METHODS: The ET database was retrospectively analyzed for donor and recipient clinical and demographic characteristics in association with graft outcomes of deceased donor renal transplantation (DDRT) across all ET countries and centers from 2014 to 2021 using Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Seventeen thousand six hundred seventy-nine renal transplantations were included (SA 15 658 [89%], REAL 860 [4.9%], and CRA 1161 [6.6%]). In CRA, donors were older, cold ischemia times were longer, and HLA matches were worse in comparison with REAL and especially SA. Multivariable analyses showed comparable graft and recipient survival between SA and REAL; however, CRA was associated with shorter graft survival. Germany performed 76% of all DDRTs after REAL and CRA and the latter mode reduced waiting times by up to 2.9 y. CONCLUSIONS: REAL and CRA are used differently in the ET countries according to national donor rates. Both RA schemes optimize graft utilization, lead to acceptable outcomes, and help to stabilize national DDRT programs, especially in Germany.

[Combination therapy with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARPi) and androgen receptor signaling pathway (ARPi) inhibitors for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer]. / Kombinationstherapie mit Inhibitoren der Poly(Adenosindiphosphat-Ribose)-Polymerasen (PARPi) und des Androgenrezeptorsignalweges (ARPi) beim metastasierten kastrationsrefraktären Prostatakarzinom.

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is a heterogeneous disease with varying clinical and molecular subtypes. Almost one-third of patients have abnormalities in homologous recombinant repair genes. Again, about one third of these mutations affect the BReast CAncer 1 or 2 (BRCA 1 or BRCA 2) genes, which generally render tumours receptive to treatment with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). In 2020 the PARPi olaparib was approved for the treatment of mCRPC after progression with a new hormonal drug (androgen receptor signaling pathway inhibitors, ARPi). In 2022 and 2023 approval of two combination therapies followed, each combining a PARPi and an ARPi (olaparib plus abiraterone and niraparib plus abiraterone). The combination of talazoparib plus enzalutamide will be approved soon. This article introduces the pivotal clinical trials that led to the approval of the respective substances, reports the side effects that may occur during therapy with PARPi plus ARPi, and offers recommendations for management of these side effects.

Tailored immunotherapy approach with nivolumab with or without nivolumab plus ipilimumab as immunotherapeutic boost in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (TITAN-RCC): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab is approved as first-line regimen for intermediate-risk or poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and nivolumab monotherapy as second-line therapy for all risk groups. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination as an immunotherapeutic boost after no response to nivolumab monotherapy in patients with intermediate-risk and poor-risk clear-cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: TITAN-RCC is a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial, done at 28 hospitals and cancer centres across Europe (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK). Adults (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed intermediate-risk or poor-risk clear-cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma who were formerly untreated (first-line population) or pretreated with one previous systemic therapy (anti-angiogenic or temsirolimus; second-line population) were eligible. Patients had to have a Karnofsky Performance Status score of at least 70 and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1). Patients started with intravenous nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks. On early progressive disease (week 8) or non-response at week 16, patients received two or four doses of intravenous nivolumab (3 mg/kg) and ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) boosts (once every 3 weeks), whereas responders continued with intravenous nivolumab (240 mg, once every 2 weeks), but could receive two to four boost doses of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for subsequent progressive disease. The primary endpoint was confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate in the full analysis set, which included all patients who received at least one dose of study medication; safety was also assessed in this population. An objective response rate of more than 25% was required to reject the null hypothesis and show improvement, on the basis of results from the pivotal phase 3 CheckMate-025 trial. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02917772, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Oct 28, 2016, and Nov 30, 2018, 207 patients were enrolled and all received nivolumab induction (109 patients in the first-line group; 98 patients in the second-line group). 60 (29%) of 207 patients were female and 147 (71%) were male. 147 (71%) of 207 patients had intermediate-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma and 51 (25%) had poor-risk disease. After median follow-up of 27·6 months (IQR 10·5-34·8), 39 (36%, 90% CI 28-44; p=0·0080) of 109 patients in the first-line group and 31 (32%, 24-40; p=0·083) of 98 patients in the second-line group had a confirmed objective response for nivolumab with and without nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Confirmed response to nivolumab at week 8 or 16 was observed in 31 (28%) of 109 patients in the first-line group and 18 (18%) of 98 patients in the second-line group. The most frequent grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (reported in ≥5% of patients) were increased lipase (15 [7%] of 207 patients), colitis (13 [6%]), and diarrhoea (13 [6%]). Three deaths were reported that were deemed to be treatment-related: one due to possible ischaemic stroke, one due to respiratory failure, and one due to pneumonia. INTERPRETATION: In treatment-naive patients, nivolumab induction with or without nivolumab plus ipilimumab boosts significantly improved the objective response rate compared with that reported for nivolumab monotherapy in the CheckMate-025 trial. However, overall efficacy seemed inferior when compared with approved upfront nivolumab plus ipilimumab. For second-line treatment, nivolumab plus ipilimumab could be a rescue strategy on progression with approved nivolumab monotherapy. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb.

Identification of bacteria in mixed infection from urinary tract of patient's samples using Raman analysis of dried droplets.

Urinary tract infections (UTI) are among the most frequent nosocomial infections. A fast identification of the pathogen and assignment of Gram type could help to prescribe most suitable treatments. Raman spectroscopy holds high potential for fast and reliable bacterial pathogens identification. While most studies so far have focused on individual pathogens or artificial mixtures, this contribution aims to translate the analysis to primary urine samples from patients with suspected UTIs. For this, we have included 59 primary urine samples out of which 29 were diagnosed as mixed infections. For Raman analysis, we first trained two classification models based on principal component analysis - linear discriminant analysis (PCA-LDA) with more than 3500 Raman spectra of 85 clinical isolates from 23 species in order to (1) identify the Gram type of the bacteria and (2) assign family membership to one of the six most abundant bacterial families in urinary tract infections (Enterobacteriaceae, Morganellaceae, Pseudomonadaceae, Enterococcaceae, Staphylococcaceae and Streptococcaceae). The classification models were applied to artificial mixtures of Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria to correctly predict mixed infections with an accuracy of 75%. Raman scans of dried droplets did not yet yield optimal classification results on family level. When translating the method to primary urine samples, we observed a strong bias towards Gram negative bacteria, on family level towards Morganellaceae, which reduced prediction accuracy. Spectral differences were observed between isolates grown on standard growth medium and bacteria of the same strain when characterized directly from the patient. Thus, improvement of the classification accuracy is expected with a larger data base containing also bacteria measured directly from the urine sample.

[Antibody-drug conjugates as new therapeutic agents in uro-oncology]. / Antikörper-Wirkstoff-Konjugate als neues Wirkprinzip in der Uroonkologie.

Antibody-drug conjugates represent a new class of therapeutic agents that are already being used in the field of uro-oncology. They consist of an antibody directed against a specific tumour antigen linked to a cytotoxic substance ("payload") which acts after internalisation into the tumour cell and its release. Currently, approval in the European Union is restricted to enfortumab vedotin which is directed against nectin­4 and carries the microtubule-inhibiting active ingredient monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE). Enfortumab vedotin is approved for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in the third line of therapy after platinum-based chemotherapy and after therapy with a programmed cell death (ligand) 1 (PD-[L]1) immune checkpoint inhibitor. However, an expansion of the indication of enfortumab vedotin as monotherapy and in combination with PD-(L)1 immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as approval of other antibody-drug conjugates is expected in the future. This could sustainably change the therapy sequence in urothelial carcinoma. Currently, several clinical trials are recruiting in different therapeutic settings. This article presents the new substance class of antibody-drug conjugates, their mechanism of action, their representatives and clinical studies, and points out practice-relevant side effects and how to deal with them.

67 Ga-PSMA I&T for Radioguided Surgery of Lymph Node Metastases in Patients With Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Radioguided lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer, and suffering from biochemical recurrence has been described thoroughly during the past few years. Several prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-directed ligands labeled with 111 In, 99m Tc, and 68 Ga have been published; however, limitations regarding availability, short half-life, high costs, and unfavorable high energy might restrict frequent use. This study aims at introducing 67 Ga as a promising radionuclide for radioguided surgery. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on 6 patients with 7 PSMA-positive lymph node metastases. 67 Ga-PSMA I&T (imaging and therapy) was synthesized in-house and intravenously applied according to §13 2b of the German Medicinal Products Act. Radioguided surgery was performed 24 hours after injection of 67 Ga-PSMA I&T using a gamma probe. Patient urine samples were collected. Occupational and waste dosimetry was performed to describe hazards arising from radiation. RESULTS: 67 Ga-PSMA application was tolerated without adverse effects. Five of 7 lymph nodes were detected on 22-hour SPECT/CT in 4 of 6 patients. During surgery, all 7 lymph node metastases were identified by positive gamma probe signal. Relevant accumulation of 67 Ga was observed in lymph node metastases (32.1 ± 15.1 kBq). Histology analysis of near-field lymph node dissection revealed more lymph node metastases than PET/CT (and gamma probe measurements) identified. Waste produced during inpatient stay required decay time of up to 11 days before reaching exemption limits according to German regulations. CONCLUSIONS: Radioguided surgery using 67 Ga-PSMA I&T is a safe and feasible option for patients suffering from biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. 67 Ga-PSMA I&T was successfully synthesized according to Good Manufacturing Practice guidelines. Radioguided surgery with 67 Ga-PSMA I&T does not lead to relevant radiation burden to urology surgeons and represents a novel interdisciplinary approach in nuclear medicine and urology.

Tailored immunotherapy approach with nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma after platinum-based chemotherapy (TITAN-TCC): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab is used after platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Studies suggest improved outcomes for dual checkpoint inhibition with high ipilimumab doses. We aimed to examine the safety and activity of nivolumab induction and high-dose ipilimumab as an immunotherapeutic boost as a second-line treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: TITAN-TCC is a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial done at 19 hospitals and cancer centres in Germany and Austria. Adults aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed metastatic or surgically unresectable urothelial cancer of the bladder, urethra, ureter, or renal pelvis were eligible. Patients had to have progression during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and up to one more second-line or third-line treatment, a Karnofsky Performance Score of 70 or higher, and measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. After four doses of intravenous nivolumab 240 mg induction monotherapy every 2 weeks, patients with a partial or complete response at week 8 continued maintenance nivolumab, whereas those with stable or progressive disease (non-responders) at week 8 received a boost of two or four doses of intravenous nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Patients who subsequently had progressive disease during nivolumab maintenance also received a boost, using this schedule. The primary endpoint was the confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate in the intention-to-treat population and had to exceed 20% for the null hypothesis to be rejected (based on the objective response rate with nivolumab monotherapy in the CheckMate-275 phase 2 trial). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03219775, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between April 8, 2019, and Feb 15, 2021, 83 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma were enrolled and all received nivolumab induction treatment (intention-to-treat population). The median age of enrolled patients was 68 years (IQR 61-76), and 57 (69%) were male and 26 (31%) were female. 50 (60%) patients received at least one boost dose. A confirmed investigator-assessed objective response was recorded in 27 (33%) of 83 patients in the intention-to-treat population, including six (7%) patients who had a complete response. This objective response rate was significantly higher than the prespecified threshold of 20% or less (33% [90% CI 24-42]; p=0·0049). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were immune-mediated enterocolitis (nine [11%] patients) and diarrhoea (five [6%] patients). Two (2%) treatment-related deaths were reported, both due to immune-mediated enterocolitis. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with nivolumab and nivolumab plus ipilimumab boosts in early non-responders and patients who progress late significantly improved objective response rate after previous platinum-based chemotherapy compared with the rate reported with nivolumab in the CheckMate-275 trial. Our study provides evidence for the added value of high-dose ipilimumab 3 mg/kg and suggests a potential role for the combination as a rescue strategy in platinum-pretreated patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb.

Management of Immune-Related Adverse Events from Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are now, among other cancers, routinely used for the treatment of advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). In mRCC various combinations of ICIs and inhibitors of the vascular epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase (VEGFR-TKIs) as well as dual checkpoint inhibition (nivolumab + ipilimumab), the latter for patients with intermediate and poor risk according to IMDC only (international metastatic renal cell carcinoma database consortium), are now standard of care in the first line setting. Therefore, a profound understanding of immune-related adverse events (irAE) and the differential diagnosis of adverse reactions caused by other therapeutic agents in combination therapies is of paramount importance. Here we describe prevention, early diagnosis and clinical management of the most relevant irAE derived from ICI treatment focusing on the new VEGFR-TKI/ICI combinations.

iRECIST-based versus non-standardized free text reporting of CT scans for monitoring metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective comparison.

PURPOSE: Therapy decision for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is highly dependent on disease monitoring based on radiological reports. The purpose of the study was to compare non-standardized, common practice free text reporting (FTR) on disease response with reporting based on response evaluation criteria in solid tumors modified for immune-based therapeutics (iRECIST). METHODS: Fifty patients with advanced mRCC were included in the retrospective, single-center study. CT scans had been evaluated and FTR prepared in accordance with center's routine practice. For study purposes, reports were re-evaluated using a dedicated computer program that applied iRECIST. Patients were followed up over a period of 22.8 ± 7.9 months in intervals of 2.7 ± 1.8 months. Weighted kappa statistics was run to assess strength of agreement. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors for different rating. RESULTS: Agreement between FTR and iRECIST-based reporting was moderate (kappa 0.38 [95% CI 0.2-0.6] to 0.70 [95% CI 0.5-0.9]). Tumor response or progression according to FTR were not confirmed with iRECIST in 19 (38%) or 11 (22%) patients, respectively, in at least one follow-up examination. With FTR, new lesions were frequently not recognized if they were already identified in the recent prior follow-up examination (odds ratio for too favorable rating of disease response compared to iRECIST: 5.4 [95% CI 2.9-10.1]. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate agreement between disease response according to FTR or iRECIST in patients with mRCC suggests the need of standardized quantitative radiological assessment in daily clinical practice.

Tailored Immunotherapy Approach With Nivolumab in Advanced Transitional Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Several anti-programmed cell death (ligand)-1 (PD-[L]1) immune checkpoint inhibitors are approved in advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Recently, improved activity of an anti-PD-1/anticytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (CTLA-4) combination versus anti-PD-1 monotherapy has been reported. We report a response-based approach starting treatment with nivolumab monotherapy with nivolumab/ipilimumab as immunotherapeutic boost. METHODS: After four doses of nivolumab induction, responders continued with nivolumab maintenance therapy. Patients with stable/progressive disease received nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 2 doses followed by nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 2 doses, if not responding to the initial boost. Responders to boosts continued with nivolumab maintenance. Between July 2017 and April 2019, 86 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up is 7.7 months. The primary end point is objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1. Secondary end points include efficacy of nivolumab induction, remission rate with nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Of all patients, 42, 39, and five were first- (1L), second- (2L), and third-line (3L), respectively. The median age was 68 years. The ORR with nivolumab monotherapy (assessed at week 8) was 29% in 1L and 23% in 2/3L, respectively. Forty-one patients received early (week 8) and 11 received later nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts. ORRs with nivolumab with or without nivolumab/ipilimumab (best overall response) were 45% and 27% in 1L and 2/3L, respectively. In 1L, 7 of 17 patients receiving boosts at week 8 improved, compared with 2 of 24 in 2/3L. CONCLUSION: The tailored approach of TITAN-TCC shows meaningful clinical activity supporting dual checkpoint inhibition in 1L mUC. However, starting therapy with nivolumab exclusively appears inadequate given the aggressive nature of mUC. In 2/3L, nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts with escalating ipilimumab dose did not improve efficacy outcomes versus nivolumab monotherapy. An independent 2L cohort of TITAN-TCC receiving nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 4 doses is ongoing.

Influence of Prostate Artery Embolization on Different Qualities of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is an increasingly used minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of PAE on voiding and storage symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Between July 2014 and May 2019, 351 consecutive men with BPO who underwent PAE were included in a single-center study. INTERVENTION: PAE is an interventional radiological procedure embolizing the prostatic arteries with microspheres. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint represented assessment of the International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 mo after PAE. Secondary endpoints comprised assessment of IPSS quality of life (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function, peak urinary flow rate, postvoid residual volume, prostate volume, and prostate-specific antigen at the same time points. Data were analyzed using standard statistical methods, generalized estimating equations (symptom improvement over time as odds ratios), and McNemar-Bowker test (degree of improvement compared between symptoms). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Clinical success rates for PAE were 68%, 73%, and 66% at 1, 12, and 24 mo, respectively. The median IPSS improved significantly from 22 to 10 points after 2 yr (p < 0.001). Storage (-50%) and voiding (-58%) symptoms improved similarly (each p < 0.001), with nocturia decreasing least frequently but significantly (p < 0.001). After 1 and 2 yr, 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] 29-41%) and 30% (95% CI 21-40%) of patients reported alleviated storage, and 39% (95% CI 33-45%) and 38% (95% CI 29-49%) reported alleviated voiding symptoms, respectively. QoL improved from 5 to 2 points (p < 0.001). The main limitation is the number of patients lost during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: PAE significantly improved voiding and storage symptoms to a similar extent. This study may aid in counseling patients about this minimally invasive BPO treatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is a minimally invasive treatment option for patients with voiding and storage symptoms from benign prostate enlargement. Our analysis shows that PAE improves relevant lower urinary tract symptoms.

Interactions in cancer treatment considering cancer therapy, concomitant medications, food, herbal medicine and other supplements.

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to analyse the frequency and severity of different types of potential interactions in oncological outpatients' therapy. Therefore, medications, food and substances in terms of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) like dietary supplements, herbs and other processed ingredients were considered. METHODS: We obtained data from questionnaires and from analysing the patient records of 115 cancer outpatients treated at a German university hospital. Drug-drug interactions were identified using a drug interaction checking software. Potential CAM-drug interactions and food-drug interactions were identified based on literature research. RESULTS: 92.2% of all patients were at risk of one or more interaction of any kind and 61.7% of at least one major drug-drug interaction. On average, physicians prescribed 10.4 drugs to each patient and 6.9 interactions were found, 2.5 of which were classified as major. The most prevalent types of drug-drug interactions were a combination of QT prolonging drugs (32.3%) and drugs with a potential for myelotoxicity (13.4%) or hepatotoxicity (10.1%). In 37.2% of all patients using CAM supplements the likelihood of interactions with medications was rated as likely. Food-drug interactions were likely in 28.7% of all patients. CONCLUSION: The high amount of interactions could not be found in literature so far. We recommend running interaction checks when prescribing any new drug and capturing CAM supplements in medication lists too. If not advised explicitly in another way drugs should be taken separately from meals and by using nonmineralized water to minimize the risk for food-drug interactions.

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) supplements in cancer outpatients: analyses of usage and of interaction risks with cancer treatment.

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to analyze the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) supplements, identify possible predictors, and analyze and compile potential interactions of CAM supplements with conventional cancer therapy. METHODS: We included outpatient cancer patients treated at a German university hospital in March or April 2020. Information was obtained from questionnaires and patient records. CAM-drug interactions were identified based on literature research for each active ingredient of the supplements consumed by the patients. RESULTS: 37.4% of a total of 115 patients consumed CAM supplements. Potential interactions with conventional cancer treatment were identified in 51.2% of these patients. All types of CAM supplements were revealed to be a potential source for interactions: vitamins, minerals, food and plant extracts, and other processed CAM substances. Younger age (< 62 years) (p = 0.020, φc = 0.229) and duration of individual cancer history of more than 1 year (p = 0.006, φc = 0.264) were associated with increased likelihood of CAM supplement use. A wide range of different CAM supplement interactions were reviewed: effects of antioxidants, cytochrome (CYP) interactions, and specific agonistic or antagonistic effects with cancer treatment. CONCLUSION: The interaction risks of conventional cancer therapy with over-the-counter CAM supplements seem to be underestimated. Supplements without medical indication, as well as overdoses, should be avoided, especially in cancer patients. To increase patient safety, physicians should address the risks of interactions in physician-patient communication, document the use of CAM supplements in patient records, and check for interactions.

Risk Stratification and Treatment Algorithm of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Systemic therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma has continuously evolved over the last two decades. Significant improvements in overall survival and quality of life of patients with advanced disease have been observed. With the approval of combination therapies with PD(L)-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as first-line therapy in 2019, the previous standard VEGFR-TKI monotherapy has been replaced as the primary treatment option. In addition to immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab, three VEGFR-TKI/ICI combinations are now approved. Therapy selection should be preceded by risk stratification using defined criteria from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC). Clinical parameters, as well as detailed patient counseling on differences in the efficacy profile (response rate, long-term progression-free survival), potential side effects, and impact on quality of life, are of key importance in the individual treatment decision.

[Side effects of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment of urological tumors]. / Nebenwirkungen der Immun-Checkpoint-Inhibitor-Therapie urologischer Tumoren.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are currently routinely used for the treatment of advanced or metastatic urothelial and renal cell carcinomas. Furthermore, several clinical trials are currently investigating their role in adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings as well as in high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. As a result, urologists are increasingly confronted with patients who are currently receiving, have recently received or will receive ICI treatment. Care is often interdisciplinary, with urologists playing a central role. Therefore, a profound understanding of immune-mediated adverse events and their differential diagnoses with respect to side effects of other medications in combination treatment are therefore extremely important. This article focusses on the prevention, early diagnosis and clinical management of the most relevant immune-related side effects derived from the new VEGFR-TKI/ICI combinations.