Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 43
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Immunity ; 50(2): 477-492.e8, 2019 02 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30737146

RESUMEN

Resistance to checkpoint-blockade treatments is a challenge in the clinic. We found that although treatment with combined anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 improved control of established tumors, this combination compromised anti-tumor immunity in the low tumor burden (LTB) state in pre-clinical models as well as in melanoma patients. Activated tumor-specific T cells expressed higher amounts of interferon-γ (IFN-γ) receptor and were more susceptible to apoptosis than naive T cells. Combination treatment induced deletion of tumor-specific T cells and altered the T cell repertoire landscape, skewing the distribution of T cells toward lower-frequency clonotypes. Additionally, combination therapy induced higher IFN-γ production in the LTB state than in the high tumor burden (HTB) state on a per-cell basis, reflecting a less exhausted immune status in the LTB state. Thus, elevated IFN-γ secretion in the LTB state contributes to the development of an immune-intrinsic mechanism of resistance to combination checkpoint blockade, highlighting the importance of achieving the optimal magnitude of immune stimulation for successful combination immunotherapy strategies.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales/farmacología , Antígeno CTLA-4/antagonistas & inhibidores , Resistencia a Antineoplásicos/efectos de los fármacos , Interferón gamma/farmacología , Neoplasias Experimentales/tratamiento farmacológico , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Linfocitos T/efectos de los fármacos , Animales , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/inmunología , Antígeno CTLA-4/inmunología , Antígeno CTLA-4/metabolismo , Línea Celular Tumoral , Supresión Clonal/efectos de los fármacos , Supresión Clonal/inmunología , Resistencia a Antineoplásicos/inmunología , Humanos , Interferón gamma/inmunología , Interferón gamma/metabolismo , Masculino , Ratones Endogámicos C57BL , Ratones Noqueados , Neoplasias Experimentales/inmunología , Neoplasias Experimentales/metabolismo , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/inmunología , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/metabolismo , Linfocitos T/inmunología , Linfocitos T/metabolismo , Carga Tumoral/efectos de los fármacos , Carga Tumoral/inmunología
2.
Curr Oncol Rep ; 26(7): 804-817, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38780676

RESUMEN

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes the latest advancements in survivorship care for patients with advanced melanoma who received systemic therapy and emphasizes the areas where more research is needed. RECENT FINDINGS: Over the last decade there have been remarkable advances in the treatment of advanced and metastatic melanoma. Due to these novel treatments, including several immune checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors, there are and will continue to be increasing numbers of long-term melanoma survivors who have been treated with systemic therapy. These patients will navigate new challenges are they are essentially among the first long term survivors after these novel therapies. Survivorship care focuses on improving the health-related quality of life of patients including the physical, emotional, social and functional effects of cancer that begin at diagnosis and continue through the end of life. Survivorship also includes screening for cancer recurrence and second cancers. As the number of melanoma survivors who received systemic therapy continues to grow, the survivorship care plan will become increasingly important for optimal care of patients even after their cancer treatments. Understanding the many domains of survivorship care for this group of patients is imperative for their care now and to identify unmet needs for future research.


Asunto(s)
Supervivientes de Cáncer , Melanoma , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/terapia , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Supervivencia
3.
World J Surg Oncol ; 22(1): 77, 2024 Mar 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38468341

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Metastatic melanoma to the small bowel is an aggressive disease often accompanied by obstruction, abdominal pain, and gastrointestinal bleeding. With advancements in melanoma treatment, the role for metastasectomy continues to evolve. Inclusion of novel immunotherapeutic agents, such as checkpoint inhibitors, into standard treatment regimens presents potential survival benefits for patients receiving metastasectomy. CASE PRESENTATION: We report an institutional experience of 15 patients (12 male, 3 female) between 2014-2022 that underwent small bowel metastasectomy for metastatic melanoma and received perioperative systemic treatment. Median age of patients was 64 years (range: 35-83 years). No patients died within 30 days of their surgery, and the median hospital length of stay was 5 days. Median overall survival in these patients was 30.1 months (range: 2-115 months). Five patients died from disease (67 days, 252 days, 426 days, 572 days, 692 days postoperatively), one patient died of non-disease related causes (1312 days postoperatively), six patients are alive with disease, and three remain disease free. CONCLUSIONS: This case series presents an updated perspective of the utility of metastasectomy for small bowel metastasis in the age of novel immunotherapeutic agents as standard systemic treatment. Small bowel metastasectomy for advanced melanoma performed in conjunction with perioperative systemic therapy is safe and appears to promote long-term survival and enhanced quality of life.


Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Metastasectomía , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Melanoma/terapia , Melanoma/patología , Calidad de Vida , Inmunoterapia , Intestino Delgado/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos
4.
Circ Res ; 128(11): 1780-1801, 2021 05 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33934609

RESUMEN

Immune-based therapies have revolutionized cancer treatments. Cardiovascular sequelae from these treatments, however, have emerged as critical complications, representing new challenges in cardio-oncology. Immune therapies include a broad range of novel drugs, from antibodies and other biologics, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and bispecific T-cell engagers, to cell-based therapies, such as chimeric-antigen receptor T-cell therapies. The recognition of immunotherapy-associated cardiovascular side effects has also catapulted new research questions revolving around the interactions between the immune and cardiovascular systems, and the signaling cascades affected by T cell activation, cytokine release, and immune system dysregulation. Here, we review the specific mechanisms of immune activation from immunotherapies and the resulting cardiovascular toxicities associated with immune activation and excess cytokine production.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/etiología , Inmunoterapia/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/terapia , Animales , Anticuerpos Biespecíficos/efectos adversos , Anticuerpos Biespecíficos/uso terapéutico , Cardiotoxicidad/inmunología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/inmunología , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/complicaciones , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/inmunología , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/terapia , Modelos Animales de Enfermedad , Perros , Humanos , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Inmunoterapia Adoptiva/efectos adversos , Inmunoterapia Adoptiva/métodos , Activación de Linfocitos , Ratones , Ratas , Receptores Quiméricos de Antígenos , Linfocitos T/trasplante
5.
Cancer ; 127(17): 3246-3253, 2021 09 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33905528

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Loneliness and social isolation are significant public health problems that are being exacerbated during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Little is known about the associations between loneliness and symptom burden in oncology patients before and during the pandemic. Study purposes include determining the prevalence of loneliness in a sample of oncology patients; evaluating for differences in demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics between lonely and nonlonely patients; and determining which demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics were associated with membership in the lonely group. METHODS: A convenience sample (n = 606) completed online surveys that evaluated the severity of loneliness, social isolation, and common symptoms (ie, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, cognitive dysfunction, and pain) in oncology patients. Parametric and nonparametric tests were used to evaluate for differences in scores between the lonely and nonlonely groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for membership in the loneliness group. RESULTS: Of the 606 patients, 53.0% were categorized in the lonely group. The lonely group reported higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher symptom severity scores for all of the symptoms evaluated. In the multivariate model, being unmarried, having higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms were associated with membership in the lonely group. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that a significant number of oncology patients are experiencing loneliness, most likely as a result of mandate social distancing and isolation procedures. The symptom burden of these patients is extremely high and warrants clinical evaluation and interventions.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/epidemiología , Soledad/psicología , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Ansiedad , Depresión , Humanos , Neoplasias/psicología , Vigilancia en Salud Pública , Factores de Riesgo , Aislamiento Social/psicología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
6.
Clin Sci (Lond) ; 135(5): 703-724, 2021 03 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33686402

RESUMEN

Immunotherapies have greatly expanded the armamentarium of cancer-directed therapies in the past decade, allowing the immune system to recognize and fight cancer. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), in particular, have revolutionized cancer treatment and have demonstrated survival benefit in numerous types of cancer. These monoclonal antibodies increase anti-cancer immunity by blocking down-regulators of adaptive immunity, including cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), and its ligand (PD-L1), resulting in anti-tumor activity. As ICIs increase immune system activation, they can cause a wide range of inflammatory side effects, termed immune-released adverse events. Though these toxicities can affect nearly any organ, the most fatal toxicity is myocarditis. Here, we discuss the diverse spectrum of cardiovascular toxicities associated with ICI use. In addition, we provide insight and future directions on mechanisms and treatments for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) involving the myocardium, pericardium, vasculature, and conduction system.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/efectos adversos , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/inducido químicamente , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Cardiotoxicidad , Humanos , Inmunoterapia/efectos adversos , Miocarditis/inducido químicamente , Neoplasias/inmunología
7.
Support Care Cancer ; 29(4): 1941-1950, 2021 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32809060

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: No information is available on cancer patients' knowledge of and experiences with COVID-19. We undertook an evaluation of differences in COVID-19 symptom occurrence rates, COVID-19 testing rates, clinical care activities, knowledge of COVID-19, and use of mitigation procedures between patients who were and were not receiving active cancer treatment. METHODS: Patients enrolled were > 18 years of age; had a diagnosis of cancer; and were able to complete the emailed study survey online. RESULTS: Of the 174 patients who participated, 27.6% (n = 48) were receiving active treatment, 13.6% were unemployed because of COVID-19, 12.2% had been tested for COVID-19, and 0.6% had been hospitalized for COVID-19. Patients who were not on active treatment reported a higher mean number of COVID-19 symptoms (3.1 (± 4.2) versus 1.9 (± 2.6)), and patients who reported a higher number of COVID-19 symptoms were more likely to be tested. Over 55% of the patients were confident that their primary care provider could diagnose COVID-19, and the majority of the patients had high levels of adherence with the use of precautionary measures (e.g., social distancing, use of face coverings). CONCLUSION: The high level of COVID-19 symptoms and the significant overlap of COVID-19 and cancer-related symptoms pose challenges for clinicians who are assessing and triaging oncology patients for COVID-19 testing. For patients on active treatment, clinicians face challenges with how to assess and manage symptoms that, prior to COVID-19, would be ascribed to acute toxicities associated with cancer treatments or persistent symptoms in cancer survivors.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/diagnóstico , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Neoplasias , Pacientes , Percepción , Adulto , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , Prueba de COVID-19/estadística & datos numéricos , Escolaridad , Femenino , Humanos , Control de Infecciones , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/psicología , Neoplasias/terapia , Pacientes/psicología , Pacientes/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuarentena , SARS-CoV-2 , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
8.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 27(11): 4122-4130, 2020 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32488521

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The frequency of "exhausted" or checkpoint-positive (PD-1+CTLA-4+) cytotoxic lymphocytes (Tex) in the tumor microenvironment is associated with response to anti-PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma. The current study determined whether pretreatment Tex cells in locally advanced melanoma predicted response to neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 blockade. METHODS: Pretreatment tumor samples from 17 patients with locally advanced melanoma underwent flow cytometric analysis of pretreatment Tex and regulatory T cell frequency. Patients who met the criteria for neoadjuvant checkpoint blockade were treated with either PD-1 monotherapy or PD-1/CTLA-4 combination therapy. Best overall response was evaluated by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors version 1.1, with recurrence-free survival (RFS) calculated by the Kaplan-Meier test. The incidence and severity of adverse events were tabulated by clinicians using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4. RESULTS: Of the neoadjuvant treated patients, 10 received anti-PD-1 monotherapy and 7 received anti-CTLA-4/PD-1 combination therapy. Of these 17 patients, 12 achieved a complete response, 4 achieved partial responses, and 1 exhibited stable disease. Surgery was subsequently performed for 11 of the 17 patients, and 8 attained a complete pathologic response. Median RFS and overall survival (OS) were not reached. Immune-related adverse events comprised four grade 3 or 4 events, including pneumonitis, transaminitis, and anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: The results showed high rates of objective response, RFS, and OS for patients undergoing immune profile-directed neoadjuvant immunotherapy for locally advanced melanoma. Furthermore, the study showed that treatment stratification based upon Tex frequency can potentially limit the adverse events associated with combination immunotherapy. These data merit further investigation with a larger validation study.


Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico , Inmunoterapia , Melanoma , Antígeno CTLA-4/antagonistas & inhibidores , Antígeno CTLA-4/inmunología , Humanos , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Melanoma/inmunología , Melanoma/terapia , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/inmunología , Microambiente Tumoral
9.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 17(7): 778-783, 2019 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31319387

RESUMEN

Clear cell basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is an unusual variant of BCC. Its pathogenesis, prognosis, and optimal management remain poorly described due to its rarity. This report presents a 51-year-old man with a history of excised BCC and cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas of the face, with multiple recurrent poorly differentiated carcinomas with clear cell changes of the shoulder for which further classification using conventional histologic means was not possible. His tumor tissue was sent to Foundation Medicine for testing, which revealed a high number of pathogenic genomic alterations, including a mutation in PTCH1. He was diagnosed with dedifferentiated BCC and started on vismodegib. He developed lung metastases while receiving vismodegib, and his disease continued to progress while he was undergoing treatment in a phase I clinical trial. Given the high number of pathogenic alterations suggestive of high tumor mutational burden, immunotherapy was considered and off-label authorization was obtained for treatment with a PD-1 antibody (pembrolizumab). He had a dramatic disease response after 4 infusions of pembrolizumab. Molecular testing was instrumental in determining the correct diagnosis and formulating appropriate treatment options for this patient. Molecular profiling of metastatic BCCs and its subtypes is essential to the development of effective targeted therapies and combination approaches.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Basocelular/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Receptor Patched-1/genética , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Carcinoma/genética , Carcinoma/patología , Carcinoma Basocelular/genética , Carcinoma Basocelular/patología , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/genética , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patología , Neoplasias Pulmonares/secundario , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mutación , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/genética
10.
Cancer ; 124(13): 2693-2703, 2018 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29579316

RESUMEN

The rate of advances in uveal melanoma has not kept pace with the rate of advances in cutaneous melanoma. Many patients lack access to or knowledge of specialty centers, and integrated multidisciplinary care between ophthalmology, radiation oncology, and medical oncology is far from the norm. This treatment isolation leads to limited communication about novel clinical trial opportunities. Clinical trials themselves are not widely available, and a lack of robust funding limits rapid and complete investigations. This review outlines the obstacles to success in uveal melanoma management and highlights strategies for overcoming these challenges. Cancer 2018;124:2693-2703. © 2018 American Cancer Society.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/diagnóstico , Melanoma/terapia , Grupo de Atención al Paciente/organización & administración , Neoplasias de la Úvea/terapia , Antineoplásicos/farmacología , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Resistencia a Antineoplásicos , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/prevención & control , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/normas , Oncología Médica/organización & administración , Oncología Médica/normas , Melanoma/diagnóstico , Melanoma/mortalidad , Melanoma/patología , Terapia Molecular Dirigida/métodos , Oftalmología/organización & administración , Oftalmología/normas , Grupo de Atención al Paciente/normas , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Pronóstico , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/terapia , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento , Resultado del Tratamiento , Úvea/diagnóstico por imagen , Úvea/patología , Neoplasias de la Úvea/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Úvea/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Úvea/patología , Espera Vigilante/organización & administración , Espera Vigilante/normas
11.
Br J Cancer ; 116(9): 1141-1147, 2017 Apr 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28324889

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 therapy has shown significant clinical activity in advanced melanoma. We developed and validated a clinical prediction scale for response to anti- PD-1 monotherapy. METHODS: A total of 315 patients with advanced melanoma treated with pembrolizumab (2 or 10 mg kg-1 Q2W or Q3W) or nivolumab (3 mg kg-1 Q2W) at four cancer centres between 2011 to 2013 served as the setting for the present cohort study. Variables with significant association to response on a univariate analysis were entered into a forward stepwise logistic regression model and were given a score based on ORs to calculate a clinical prediction scale. RESULTS: The developed clinical prediction scale included elevated LDH (1 point), age <65 years (1 point), female sex (1 point), history of ipilimumab treatment (2 points) and the presence of liver metastasis (2 points). The scale had an area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) of 0.73 (95% CI 0.67, 0.80) in predicting response to therapy. The predictive performance of the score was maintained in the validation cohort (AUC 0.70 (95% CI 0.58, 0.81)) and the goodness-to-fit model demonstrated good calibration. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a large cohort of patients, we developed and validated a simple five-factor prediction scale for the clinical activity of PD-1 antibodies in advanced melanoma patients. This scale can be used to stratify patients participating in clinical trials.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Inmunoterapia , Melanoma/terapia , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Femenino , Regulación Neoplásica de la Expresión Génica/efectos de los fármacos , Humanos , Ipilimumab , L-Lactato Deshidrogenasa/genética , Masculino , Melanoma/inmunología , Melanoma/patología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Nivolumab , Pronóstico , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/inmunología
12.
Oncologist ; 22(7): 823-833, 2017 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28526719

RESUMEN

Tremendous progress has been made in the clinical landscape of advanced-stage BRAF V600-mutant melanoma treatment over the past 5 years. Targeted therapies that inhibit specific steps of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway have been shown to provide significant overall treatment benefit in patients with this difficult-to-treat disease. Combination therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors (dabrafenib plus trametinib or vemurafenib plus cobimetinib, respectively) has become standard of care. These agents are administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurs; thus, some patients may remain on maintenance therapy for an extended period of time, while toxicities may result in early discontinuation in other patients. Because the goal of treatment is to prolong survival with minimal impairment of quality of life, drug-related adverse events (AEs) require prompt management to ensure that patients derive the best possible benefit from therapy. Proper management depends on an understanding of which AEs are most likely BRAF or MEK inhibitor associated, thus providing a rationale for dose modification of the appropriate drug. Additionally, the unique safety profile of the chosen regimen may influence patient selection and monitoring. This review discusses the toxicity profiles of these agents, with a focus on the most commonly reported and serious AEs. Here, we offer practical guidance derived from our clinical experience for the optimal management of key drug-related AEs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Targeted therapy with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors has become the standard of care for patients with advanced-stage BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma. To provide optimal therapeutic benefit to patients, clinicians need a keen understanding of the toxicity profiles of these drugs. Prompt identification and an understanding of which adverse events are most likely BRAF or MEK inhibitor associated provide a rationale for appropriate therapy adjustments. Practical recommendations derived from clinical experience are provided for management of key drug-related toxicities.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Azetidinas/administración & dosificación , Azetidinas/efectos adversos , Bencimidazoles/administración & dosificación , Bencimidazoles/efectos adversos , Carbamatos/administración & dosificación , Carbamatos/efectos adversos , Fiebre/inducido químicamente , Fiebre/terapia , Humanos , Imidazoles/administración & dosificación , Imidazoles/efectos adversos , Indoles/efectos adversos , Melanoma/patología , Quinasas de Proteína Quinasa Activadas por Mitógenos/antagonistas & inhibidores , Oximas/administración & dosificación , Oximas/efectos adversos , Piperidinas/administración & dosificación , Piperidinas/efectos adversos , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/antagonistas & inhibidores , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Piridonas/administración & dosificación , Piridonas/efectos adversos , Pirimidinonas/administración & dosificación , Pirimidinonas/efectos adversos , Enfermedades de la Piel/inducido químicamente , Sulfonamidas/administración & dosificación , Sulfonamidas/efectos adversos , Vemurafenib
13.
Cancer ; 122(21): 3344-3353, 2016 Nov 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27533448

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Antibodies inhibiting the programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) have demonstrated significant activity in the treatment of advanced cutaneous melanoma. The efficacy and safety of PD-1 blockade in patients with uveal melanoma has not been well characterized. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with stage IV uveal melanoma received PD-1 or PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) antibodies between 2009 and 2015 at 9 academic centers. Patients who were evaluable for response were eligible for the analysis. Imaging was performed every 12 weeks and at the investigators' discretion. Safety and clinical efficacy outcomes, including the best overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), were retrospectively determined. RESULTS: Of 56 eligible patients, 48 (86%) had received prior therapy, and 35 (63%) had received treatment with ipilimumab. Three patients had an objective response to ipilimumab, and 8 had stable disease as their best response. Thirty-eight patients (68%) received pembrolizumab, 16 (29%) received nivolumab, and 2 (4%) received atezolizumab. Objective tumor responses were observed in 2 patients for an overall response rate of 3.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8%-22.5%). Stable disease (≥6 months) was observed in 5 patients (9%). The median PFS was 2.6 months (95% CI, 2.4-2.8 months), and the median OS was 7.6 months (95% CI, 0.7-14.6 months). There was no association between prior treatment with ipilimumab or liver-directed therapy and PFS or OS. Treatment was well tolerated, and only 1 patient discontinued treatment because of toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: PD-1 and PD-L1 antibodies rarely confer durable remissions in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Clinical trial enrollment should be prioritized in this population. Cancer 2016;122:3344-3353. © 2016 American Cancer Society.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Antígeno B7-H1/inmunología , Melanoma/patología , Membrana Mucosa/patología , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/inmunología , Neoplasias de la Úvea/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/inmunología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Membrana Mucosa/efectos de los fármacos , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Nivolumab , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Tasa de Supervivencia , Neoplasias de la Úvea/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Úvea/inmunología , Melanoma Cutáneo Maligno
14.
Cancer ; 122(21): 3354-3362, 2016 Nov 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27533633

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic antibodies against programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1) are considered front-line therapy in metastatic melanoma. The efficacy of PD-1 blockade for patients with biologically distinct melanomas arising from acral and mucosal surfaces has not been well described. METHODS: A multi-institutional, retrospective cohort analysis identified adults with advanced acral and mucosal melanoma who received treatment with nivolumab or pembrolizumab as standard clinical practice through expanded access programs or published prospective trials. Objective responses were determined using investigator-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Progression-free survival and overall survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Sixty individuals were identified, including 25 (42%) with acral melanoma and 35 (58%) with mucosal melanoma. Fifty-one patients (85%) had received previous therapy, including 77% who had previously received ipilimumab. Forty patients (67%) received pembrolizumab at a dose of 2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg, and 20 (33%) received nivolumab at a doses ranging from 0.3 to 10 mg/kg every 2 to 3 weeks. The objective response rate was 32% (95% confidence interval, 15%-54%) in patients with acral melanoma and 23% (95% confidence interval, 10%-40%) in those with mucosal melanoma. After a median follow-up of 20 months in the acral melanoma group and 10.6 months in the mucosal melanoma group, the median progression-free survival was 4.1 months and 3.9 months, respectively. Only 2 patients (3%) discontinued treatment because of toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Response rates to PD-1 blockade in patients with acral and mucosal melanomas were comparable to the published rates in patients with cutaneous melanoma and support the routine use of PD-1 blockade in clinical practice. Further investigation is needed to identify the mechanisms of response and resistance to therapy in these subtypes. Cancer 2016;122:3354-3362. © 2016 American Cancer Society.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundario , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Melanoma/patología , Membrana Mucosa/patología , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/inmunología , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/inmunología , Masculino , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/inmunología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Membrana Mucosa/efectos de los fármacos , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Nivolumab , Pronóstico , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/inmunología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/inmunología , Tasa de Supervivencia
15.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(7)2024 Mar 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38611025

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous melanoma (CM) can be molecularly classified into four groups: BRAF mutant, NRAS mutant, NF1 mutant and triple wild-type (TWT) tumors lacking any of these three alterations. In the era of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) and targeted molecular therapy, the clinical significance of these groups remains unclear. Here, we integrate targeted DNA sequencing with comprehensive clinical follow-up in CM patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study that assessed clinical and molecular features from patients with localized or metastatic CM who underwent targeted next-generation sequencing as part of routine clinical care. A total of 254 patients with CM who had a CLIA-certified targeted sequencing assay performed on their tumor tissue were included. RESULTS: Of the 254 patients with cutaneous melanoma, 77 were BRAF mutant (30.3%), 77 were NRAS mutant (30.3%), 47 were NF1 mutant (18.5%), 33 were TWT (13.0%) and the remaining 20 (7.9%) carried mutations in multiple driver genes (BRAF/NRAS/NF1 co-mutated). The majority of this co-mutation group carried mutations in NF1 (n = 19 or 90%) with co-occurring mutations in BRAF or NRAS, often with a weaker oncogenic variant. Consistently, NF1 mutant tumors harbored numerous significantly co-altered genes compared to BRAF or NRAS mutant tumors. The majority of TWT tumors (n = 29, 87.9%) harbor a pathogenic mutation within a known Ras/MAPK signaling pathway component. Of the 154 cases with available TMB data, the median TMB was 20 (range 0.7-266 mutations/Mb). A total of 14 cases (9.1%) were classified as having a low TMB (≤5 mutations/Mb), 64 of 154 (41.6%) had an intermediate TMB (>5 and ≤20 mutations/Mb), 40 of 154 (26.0%) had a high TMB (>20 and ≤50 mutations/Mb) and 36 of 154 (23.4%) were classified as having a very high TMB (>50 mutations/Mb). NRAS mutant melanoma demonstrated significantly decreased overall survival on multivariable analysis (HR for death 2.95, 95% CI 1.13-7.69, p = 0.027, log-rank test) compared with other TCGA molecular subgroups. Of the 116 patients in our cohort with available treatment data, 36 received a combination of dual ICI with anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 inhibition as first-line therapy. Elevated TMB was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival following dual-agent ICI (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.90, p = 0.033, log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: NRAS mutation in CMs correlated with significantly worse overall survival. Elevated TMB was associated with increased progression-free survival for patients treated with a combination of dual ICI, supporting the potential utility of TMB as a predictive biomarker for ICI response in melanoma.

16.
BMJ Support Palliat Care ; 13(e3): e1351-e1362, 2024 Jan 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37541779

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: In a sample of patients with cancer (n=1145) who were assessed during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, latent profile analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with distinct stress profiles and to evaluate for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics and symptom severity scores among these subgroups. METHODS: Patients completed measures of cancer-specific and COVID-19 stress, global stress, social isolation, loneliness, depression, state and trait anxiety, morning and evening fatigue, morning and evening energy, sleep disturbance, cognitive function, and pain. Latent profile analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with distinct stress profiles. Differences among the subgroups in study measures were evaluated using parametric and non-parametric tests. RESULTS: Using clinically meaningful cut-off scores for the stress measures, four distinct stress profiles were identified (ie, none class (51.3%); low stress and moderate loneliness class (24.4%), high stress and moderate loneliness class (14.0%), and very high stress and moderately high loneliness class (high, 10.3%)). Risk factors associated with membership in the high class included: younger age, lower annual household income, lower functional status and higher comorbidity burden. The two worst stress profiles reported clinically meaningful levels of all of the common symptoms associated with cancer and its treatments. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study, obtained prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines and anti-viral medications, provide important 'benchmark data' to evaluate for changes in stress and symptom burden in patients with cancer in the postvaccine era and in patients with long COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Carga Sintomática , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Pandemias , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19 , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Fatiga/epidemiología , Fatiga/etiología
17.
Neurooncol Adv ; 6(1): vdae033, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38725995

RESUMEN

Background: POLARIS (phase 2 [ph2]; NCT03911869) evaluated encorafenib (BRAF inhibitor) in combination with binimetinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor) in BRAF/MEK inhibitor-naïve patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma with asymptomatic brain metastases. Methods: The safety lead-in (SLI) assessed tolerability for high-dose encorafenib 300 mg twice daily (BID) plus binimetinib 45 mg BID. If the high dose was tolerable in ph2, patients would be randomized to receive high or standard dose (encorafenib 450 mg once daily [QD] plus binimetinib 45 mg BID). Otherwise, standard dose was evaluated as the recommended ph2 dose (RP2D). Patients who tolerated standard dosing during Cycle 1 could be dose escalated to encorafenib 600 mg QD plus binimetinib 45 mg BID in Cycle 2. Safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics were examined. Results: RP2D was standard encorafenib dosing, as >33% of evaluable SLI patients (3/9) had dose-limiting toxicities. Overall, of 13 safety-evaluable patients (10 SLI, 3 ph2), 9 had prior immunotherapy. There were 9 treatment-related adverse events in the SLI and 3 in ph2. Of the SLI efficacy-evaluable patients (n = 10), 1 achieved complete response and 5 achieved partial responses (PR); the brain metastasis response rate (BMRR) was 60% (95% CI: 26.2, 87.8). In ph2, 2 of 3 patients achieved PR (BMRR, 67% [95% CI: 9.4, 99.2]). Repeated encorafenib 300 mg BID dosing did not increase steady-state exposure compared with historical 450 mg QD data. Conclusions: Despite small patient numbers due to early trial termination, BMRR appeared similar between the SLI and ph2, and the ph2 safety profile appeared consistent with previous reports of standard-dose encorafenib in combination with binimetinib.

18.
World Neurosurg ; 170: e514-e519, 2023 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36400359

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases occur frequently in advanced melanoma and traditionally require surgery and radiation therapy. New evidence demonstrates that systemic therapies are effective for controlling metastatic melanoma brain metastases. This study evaluated outcomes after resection of melanoma brain metastases treated with systemic therapy, with or without focal radiotherapy. METHODS: All patients received immunotherapy or BRAF/MEK inhibitors preoperatively or in the immediate 3 months postoperatively. Resection cavity failure, distant central nervous system progression, and adverse radiation effects were reported in the presence and absence of focal radiotherapy using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2020, 37 resection cavities in 29 patients met criteria for analysis. Of lesions, 22 (59%) were treated with focal radiotherapy, and 15 (41%) were treated with targeted therapy or immunotherapy alone. The 12- and 24-month freedom from local recurrence was 64.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 42.1%-99.8%) and 46.3% (95% CI 24.5%-87.5%), respectively, for systemic therapy alone and 93.3% (95% CI 81.5%-100%) at both time points for focal radiotherapy (P = 0.01). On univariate analysis, focal radiotherapy was the only significant factor associated with reduction of local recurrence risk (hazard ratio 0.10, 95% CI 0.01-0.85; P = 0.04). There were no significant differences in central nervous system progression-free survival or overall survival between patients who received systemic therapy plus focal radiotherapy compared with systemic therapy alone. BRAF mutation status was reviewed for either the brain metastasis (n = 9 patients, 31%) or the primary site (n = 20 patients, 69%), and patients harboring BRAFV600E mutations had worse progression-free survival (P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Focal radiotherapy with systemic therapy for resected melanoma brain metastases significantly decreased resection cavity recurrence compared with systemic therapy alone. BRAF mutation status correlated with poorer outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Encefálicas , Melanoma , Radiocirugia , Humanos , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Radiocirugia/métodos , Neoplasias Encefálicas/genética , Neoplasias Encefálicas/terapia , Neoplasias Encefálicas/patología , Melanoma/terapia , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas , Mutación , Estudios Retrospectivos
19.
Oncol Nurs Forum ; 50(5): 647-664, 2023 08 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37677766

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate for subgroups of patients with distinct symptom profiles and differences in demographic and clinical characteristics and stress and resilience among these subgroups. SAMPLE & SETTING: 1,145 patients with cancer aged 18 years or older completed a survey online. Data were collected between May 2020 and February 2021. METHODS & VARIABLES: Patients completed measures for depression, state anxiety, cognitive function, morning fatigue, evening fatigue, morning energy, evening energy, sleep disturbance, pain, stress, and resilience. Latent class profile analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with distinct symptom profiles. Differences among the subgroups on study measures were evaluated using parametric and nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Four distinct profiles were identified (none, low, high, and very high). Patients in the high and very high classes reported clinically meaningful levels of all nine symptoms. Differences among the four profiles for stress and resilience exhibited a dose-response effect. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Findings can serve as benchmark data of the symptom burden of patients with cancer following the COVID-19 pandemic.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Humanos , Pandemias , Factores de Riesgo , Fatiga/etiología
20.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(8): e2329186, 2023 08 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37589977

RESUMEN

Importance: Central nervous system (CNS)-penetrant systemic therapies have significantly advanced care for patients with melanoma brain metastases. However, improved understanding of the molecular landscape and microenvironment of these lesions is needed to both optimize patient selection and advance treatment approaches. Objective: To evaluate how bulk and single-cell genomic features of melanoma brain metastases are associated with clinical outcome and treatment response. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed bulk DNA sequencing and single nuclear RNA-sequencing data from resected melanoma brain metastases and included 94 consecutive patients with a histopathologically confirmed diagnosis of melanoma brain metastasis who underwent surgical resection at a single National Comprehensive Cancer Network cancer center in San Francisco, California, from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2022. Exposure: A Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified targeted sequencing assay was used to analyze tumor resection specimens, with a focus on BRAF V600E alteration. For frozen pathologic specimens from CNS treatment-naive patients undergoing surgical resection, commercial single nuclear RNA sequencing approaches were used. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included CNS progression-free survival (PFS), microenvironmental composition with decreased T-cell and macrophage populations, and responses to immunotherapy. Results: To correlate molecular status with clinical outcome, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of 94 consecutive patients (median age, 64 years [range, 24-82 years]; 70 men [74%]) with targeted BRAF alteration testing showed worse median intracranial PFS (BRAF variant: 3.6 months [IQR, 0.1-30.6 months]; BRAF wildtype: 11.0 months [IQR, 0.8-81.5 months]; P < .001) and OS (BRAF variant: 9.8 months [IQR, 2.5-69.4 months]; BRAF wildtype: 23.2 months [IQR, 1.1-102.5 months]; P = .005; log-rank test) in BRAF V600E variant tumors. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed that BRAF V600E status was an independent variable significantly associated with both PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.65; 95% CI, 1.54-4.57; P < .001) and OS (HR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.08-3.55; P = .03). For the 45 patients with resected melanoma brain metastases undergoing targeted DNA sequencing, molecular classification recapitulated The Cancer Genome Atlas groups (NRAS variant, BRAF variant, NF1 variant, and triple wildtype) with no subtype enrichment within the brain metastasis cohort. On a molecular level, BRAF V600E variant lesions were found to have a significantly decreased tumor mutation burden. Moreover, single nuclear RNA sequencing of treatment-naive BRAF V600E variant (n = 3) brain metastases compared with BRAF wildtype (n = 3) brain metastases revealed increased immune cell populations in BRAF wildtype tumors (mean [SD], 11% [4.1%] vs 3% [1.6%] CD45-positive cells; P = .04). Survival analysis of postoperative immunotherapy responses by BRAF status revealed that BRAF wildtype lesions were associated with a response to checkpoint inhibition (median OS: with immunotherapy, undefined; without immunotherapy, 13.0 months [range, 1.1-61.7 months]; P = .001; log-rank test) while BRAF variant lesions (median OS: with immunotherapy, 9.8 months [range, 2.9-39.8 months]; without immunotherapy, 9.5 months [range, 2.5-67.2 months]; P = .81; log-rank test) were not. Conclusions and Relevance: This molecular analysis of patients with resected melanoma brain metastases found that BRAF V600E alteration is an important translational biomarker associated with worse clinical outcomes, differential microenvironmental composition, and benefit from immunotherapy. Patients with BRAF V600E variant melanoma brain metastases may thus benefit from alternative CNS-penetrant systemic regimens.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Encefálicas , Melanoma , Masculino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios de Cohortes , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Neoplasias Encefálicas/genética , Neoplasias Encefálicas/terapia , Inmunoterapia , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/terapia , Microambiente Tumoral
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA