ABSTRACT
The treatment of advanced prostate cancer has evolved due to recent advances in molecular research and new drug development. Dynamic aberrations in the androgen receptor, DNA repair genes, PTEN-PI3K, and other pathways drive the behavior of advanced prostate cancer allowing a better selection of therapies in each patient. Tumor testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 is recommended for patients with metastatic prostate cancer, also considering a broad panel to guide decisions and genetic counseling. In symptomatic metastatic patients, castration should be stared to palliate symptoms and prolong survival. In high-risk or high-volume metastatic hormone-naïve patients, castration should be combined with docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide or apalutamide. Radiotherapy to the primary tumor combined with systemic therapy is recommended in low-volume mHNPC patients. In patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant tumors, risk stratification can define the frequency of imaging. Adding enzalutamide, darolutamide or apalutamide to these patients prolongs metastasis-free and overall survival, but potential adverse events need to be taken into consideration. The choice of docetaxel, abiraterone or enzalutamide for treating metastatic castration-resistant patients depends on previous therapies, with cabazitaxel being also recommended after docetaxel. Olaparib is recommended in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutated castration-resistant patients after progression on at least one new hormonal therapy. Aggressive variants of prostate cancer respond to platinum-based chemotherapy. To optimize treatment efficiency, oncologists should incorporate all of these advances into an overall therapeutic strategy (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasm Staging , Biomarkers, Tumor , Genetic Markers , Societies, Medical , SpainABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Women represent an increasing proportion of the oncology workforce; however, globally this does not translate into leadership roles, reflecting disparities in career opportunities between men and women. The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) undertook a survey to investigate gender disparity in the Spanish oncology context. DESIGN: An online survey was made available to SEOM medical oncologists between February and May 2019. It included demographics, professional context and achievements, parenthood and family conciliation issues, workplace gender bias, and approaches to address disparities. RESULTS: Of the 316 eligible respondents, 71.5% were women, 59.5% were aged 45 or younger, and 66.1% had children. Among women, 12.4% were division or unit heads, compared with 45.5% of men, with most women (74.3%) being attending medical oncologists, compared with 45.5% of men. More males were professors (34.4% versus 14.2% of females), had a PhD (46.7% versus 28.8%), and/or had led clinical research groups (41.1% versus 9.7%). Spending time overseas after completing a residency was also more common for men than women (34.4% versus 20.4%). Professional satisfaction was similar between genders, driven primarily by patient care and intellectual stimulation. More women (40.7%) considered parenthood to have a strong negative impact on their career, compared with men (9.0%). Main perceived barriers to gender equality included a lack of work-life balance (72.6% women, 44.4% men), bias of peers and superiors (50.0% women, 18.9% men), and different career goals (41.2% women, 24.4% men). Preferred solutions included educational programs and scholarships (52.9%), communication and leadership training (35.8%), childcare at conferences (33.2%), and postmaternity return-to-work incentives (32.0%). CONCLUSION: There is a clear paucity of equal opportunities for female oncologists in Spain. This can be addressed by encouraging professional development and merit recognition particularly for younger female oncologists, and empowering women to be involved in management and leadership of institutions and professional societies.
Subject(s)
Job Satisfaction , Oncologists , Child , Female , Humans , Leadership , Male , Medical Oncology , Sexism , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
The treatment of advanced prostate cancer has evolved due to recent advances in molecular research and new drug development. Dynamic aberrations in the androgen receptor, DNA repair genes, PTEN-PI3K, and other pathways drive the behavior of advanced prostate cancer allowing a better selection of therapies in each patient. Tumor testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 is recommended for patients with metastatic prostate cancer, also considering a broad panel to guide decisions and genetic counseling. In symptomatic metastatic patients, castration should be stared to palliate symptoms and prolong survival. In high-risk or high-volume metastatic hormone-naïve patients, castration should be combined with docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide or apalutamide. Radiotherapy to the primary tumor combined with systemic therapy is recommended in low-volume mHNPC patients. In patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant tumors, risk stratification can define the frequency of imaging. Adding enzalutamide, darolutamide or apalutamide to these patients prolongs metastasis-free and overall survival, but potential adverse events need to be taken into consideration. The choice of docetaxel, abiraterone or enzalutamide for treating metastatic castration-resistant patients depends on previous therapies, with cabazitaxel being also recommended after docetaxel. Olaparib is recommended in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutated castration-resistant patients after progression on at least one new hormonal therapy. Aggressive variants of prostate cancer respond to platinum-based chemotherapy. To optimize treatment efficiency, oncologists should incorporate all of these advances into an overall therapeutic strategy.
Subject(s)
Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Androstenes/therapeutic use , Benzamides/therapeutic use , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Docetaxel/therapeutic use , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Genetic Testing/methods , Humans , Male , Medical Oncology , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Orchiectomy , Phenylthiohydantoin/therapeutic use , Phthalazines/therapeutic use , Piperazines/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms/genetics , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/therapy , Radiotherapy/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Societies, Medical , Spain , Thiohydantoins/therapeutic useABSTRACT
The management of genitourinary cancer, including bladder, prostate, renal and testicular cancer, has evolved dramatically in recent years due to a better understanding of tumour genetic mutations, alterations in molecular pathways, and to the development of new kinds of drugs such as targeted therapies and immunotherapies. In the field of immunotherapy, new drugs focused on stimulating, enhancing and modulating the immune system to detect and destroy cancer, have been recently discovered. Research in oncology moves quickly and new data of great relevance for clinical practice are communicated every year. For this reason, a group of experts, focused exclusively on the treatment of genitourinary tumours and who get together every year in the BestGU conference to assess the latest progress in this field have summarized the most important advances in a single review, along with a critical assessment of whether these results should alter daily clinical practice.
Subject(s)
Urogenital Neoplasms/genetics , Urogenital Neoplasms/therapy , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials as Topic , Cystectomy , Drugs, Investigational/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Immunotherapy/methods , Immunotherapy/trends , Kidney Neoplasms/genetics , Kidney Neoplasms/therapy , Male , Molecular Targeted Therapy/methods , Mutation , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/therapy , Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal/genetics , Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal/therapy , Nephrectomy , Prostatic Neoplasms/genetics , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/genetics , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapySubject(s)
Medical Oncology/standards , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/therapy , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Humans , Immunotherapy/methods , Molecular Targeted Therapy/methods , Mutation , Neoplasm Staging , Neoplasms/genetics , Practice Guidelines as TopicABSTRACT
Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 high penetrance genes account for most hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, although other new high-moderate penetrance genes included in multigene panels have increased the genetic diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families by 50%. Multigene cancer panels provide new challenges related to increased frequency of variants of uncertain significance, new gene-specific cancer risk assessments, and clinical recommendations for carriers of mutations of new genes. Although clinical criteria for genetic testing continue to be largely based on personal and family history with around a 10% detection rate, broader criteria are being applied with a lower threshold for detecting mutations when there are therapeutic implications for patients with breast or ovarian cancer. In this regard, new models of genetic counselling and testing are being implemented following the registration of PARP inhibitors for individuals who display BRCA mutations. Massive sequencing techniques in tumor tissue is also driving a paradigm shift in genetic testing and potential identification of germline mutations. In this paper, we review the current clinical criteria for genetic testing, as well as surveillance recommendations in healthy carriers, risk reduction surgical options, and new treatment strategies in breast cancer gene-mutated carriers.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Mutation , Neoplasm Proteins/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Female , Humans , Medical Oncology , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
In this article, we review de state of the art on the management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and provide recommendations on diagnosis and treatment. Recent advances in molecular biology have allowed the subclassification of renal tumours into different histologic variants and may help to identify future prognostic and predictive factors. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. No adjuvant therapy has demonstrated a clear benefit in overall survival. Considering the whole population of patients with advanced disease, the combination of axitinib with either pembrolizumab or avelumab increase response rate and progression-free survival, compared to sunitinib, but a longer overall survival has only been demonstrated so far with the pembrolizumab combo. For patients with IMDC intermediate and poor prognosis, nephrectomy should not be considered mandatory. In this subpopulation, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has also demonstrated a superior response rate and overall survival vs. sunitinib. In patients progressing to one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, both nivolumab and cabozantinib in monotherapy have shown benefit in overall survival compared to everolimus. Although no clear sequence can be recommended, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in patients with metastatic RCC.
Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Kidney Neoplasms/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Humans , Medical Oncology , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
The conflict of interest declaration was published incorrectly in the original version.
ABSTRACT
Due to a technical issue, the family name of the author.
ABSTRACT
The goal of this article is to provide recommendations about the management of muscle-invasive (MIBC) and metastatic bladder cancer. New molecular subtypes of MIBC are associated with specific clinical-pathological characteristics. Radical cystectomy and lymph node dissection are the gold standard for treatment and neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a cisplatin-based combination should be recommended in fit patients. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in MIBC remains controversial; its use must be considered in patients with high-risk who are able to tolerate a cisplatin-based regimen, and have not received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Bladder-preserving approaches are reasonable alternatives to cystectomy in selected patients for whom cystectomy is not contemplated either for clinical or personal reasons. Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the standard first-line protocol for metastatic disease. In the case of unfit patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine should be considered the preferred first-line chemotherapy treatment option, while pembrolizumab and atezolizumab can be contemplated for individuals with high PD-L1 expression. In cases of progression after platinum-based therapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are standard alternatives. Vinflunine is another option when anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy is not possible. There are no data from randomized clinical trials regarding moving on to immuno-oncology agents
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapy , Muscle Neoplasms/therapy , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Neoplasm Invasiveness/pathology , Muscle Neoplasms/secondary , Cystectomy/methods , Practice Patterns, Physicians'ABSTRACT
The goal of this article is to provide recommendations about the management of muscle-invasive (MIBC) and metastatic bladder cancer. New molecular subtypes of MIBC are associated with specific clinical-pathological characteristics. Radical cystectomy and lymph node dissection are the gold standard for treatment and neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a cisplatin-based combination should be recommended in fit patients. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in MIBC remains controversial; its use must be considered in patients with high-risk who are able to tolerate a cisplatin-based regimen, and have not received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Bladder-preserving approaches are reasonable alternatives to cystectomy in selected patients for whom cystectomy is not contemplated either for clinical or personal reasons. Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the standard first-line protocol for metastatic disease. In the case of unfit patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine should be considered the preferred first-line chemotherapy treatment option, while pembrolizumab and atezolizumab can be contemplated for individuals with high PD-L1 expression. In cases of progression after platinum-based therapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are standard alternatives. Vinflunine is another option when anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy is not possible. There are no data from randomized clinical trials regarding moving on to immuno-oncology agents.
Subject(s)
Muscle Neoplasms/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapy , Clinical Trials as Topic , Combined Modality Therapy , Disease Management , Humans , Muscle Neoplasms/secondary , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Prognosis , Societies, Medical , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
The goal of this article is to provide recommendations about the management of kidney cancer. Based on pathologic and molecular features, several kidney cancer variants were described. Nephron-sparing techniques are the gold standard of localized disease. After a randomized trial, sunitinib could be considered in adjuvant treatment in high-risk patients. Patients with advanced disease constitute a heterogeneous population. Prognostic classification should be considered. Both sunitinib and pazopanib are the standard options for first-line systemic therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Based on the results of two randomized trials, both nivolumab and cabozantinib should be considered the standard for second and further lines of therapy. Response evaluation for present therapies is a challenge (AU)
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Kidney Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Nephrectomy , Risk Factors , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/therapy , Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor/analysis , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
The goal of this article is to provide recommendations about the management of kidney cancer. Based on pathologic and molecular features, several kidney cancer variants were described. Nephron-sparing techniques are the gold standard of localized disease. After a randomized trial, sunitinib could be considered in adjuvant treatment in high-risk patients. Patients with advanced disease constitute a heterogeneous population. Prognostic classification should be considered. Both sunitinib and pazopanib are the standard options for first-line systemic therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Based on the results of two randomized trials, both nivolumab and cabozantinib should be considered the standard for second and further lines of therapy. Response evaluation for present therapies is a challenge.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell/therapy , Kidney Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology , Humans , Kidney Neoplasms/diagnosis , Kidney Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to identify biomarkers to guide personalized therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We aimed to clinically qualify androgen receptor (AR) gene status measurement in plasma DNA using multiplex droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) in pre- and post-chemotherapy CRPC. METHODS: We optimized ddPCR assays for AR copy number and mutations and retrospectively analyzed plasma DNA from patients recruited to one of the three biomarker protocols with prospectively collected clinical data. We evaluated associations between plasma AR and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 73 chemotherapy-naïve and 98 post-docetaxel CRPC patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone (Primary cohort) and 94 chemotherapy-naïve patients treated with enzalutamide (Secondary cohort; PREMIERE trial). RESULTS: In the primary cohort, AR gain was observed in 10 (14%) chemotherapy-naïve and 33 (34%) post-docetaxel patients and associated with worse OS [hazard ratio (HR), 3.98; 95% CI 1.74-9.10; P < 0.001 and HR 3.81; 95% CI 2.28-6.37; P < 0.001, respectively], PFS (HR 2.18; 95% CI 1.08-4.39; P = 0.03, and HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.23-3.11; P = 0.01, respectively) and rate of PSA decline ≥50% [odds ratio (OR), 4.7; 95% CI 1.17-19.17; P = 0.035 and OR, 5.0; 95% CI 1.70-14.91; P = 0.003, respectively]. AR mutations [2105T>A (p.L702H) and 2632A>G (p.T878A)] were observed in eight (11%) post-docetaxel but no chemotherapy-naïve abiraterone-treated patients and were also associated with worse OS (HR 3.26; 95% CI 1.47-not reached; P = 0.004). There was no interaction between AR and docetaxel status (P = 0.83 for OS, P = 0.99 for PFS). In the PREMIERE trial, 11 patients (12%) with AR gain had worse PSA-PFS (sPFS) (HR 4.33; 95% CI 1.94-9.68; P < 0.001), radiographic-PFS (rPFS) (HR 8.06; 95% CI 3.26-19.93; P < 0.001) and OS (HR 11.08; 95% CI 2.16-56.95; P = 0.004). Plasma AR was an independent predictor of outcome on multivariable analyses in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: Plasma AR status assessment using ddPCR identifies CRPC with worse outcome to enzalutamide or abiraterone. Prospective evaluation of treatment decisions based on plasma AR is now required. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT02288936 (PREMIERE trial).
Subject(s)
Androstenes/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Biomarkers, Tumor/blood , Circulating Tumor DNA/blood , Phenylthiohydantoin/analogs & derivatives , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Receptors, Androgen/blood , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Androstenes/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/adverse effects , Benzamides , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Circulating Tumor DNA/genetics , DNA Mutational Analysis , Disease Progression , Disease-Free Survival , Europe , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction , Multivariate Analysis , Mutation , Nitriles , Odds Ratio , Patient Selection , Phenylthiohydantoin/adverse effects , Phenylthiohydantoin/therapeutic use , Precision Medicine , Predictive Value of Tests , Proportional Hazards Models , Prospective Studies , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/genetics , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/mortality , Receptors, Androgen/genetics , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
The goal of this article is to provide recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. The diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer is made by pathologic evaluation after transurethral resection. Recently, a molecular classification has been proposed. Staging of muscle-invasive bladder cancer must be done by computed tomography scans of the chest, abdomen and pelvis and classified on the basis of UICC system. Radical cystectomy and lymph node dissection are the treatment of choice. In muscle-invasive bladder cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be recommended in patients with good performance status and no renal function impairment. Although there is insufficient evidence for use of adjuvant chemotherapy, its use must be considered when neoadjuvant therapy had not been administered in high-risk patients. Multimodality bladder-preserving treatment in localized disease is an alternative in selected and compliant patients for whom cystectomy is not considered for clinical or personal reasons. In metastatic disease, the first-line treatment for patients must be based on cisplatin-containing combination. Vinflunine is the only drug approved for use in second line in Europe. Recently, immunotherapy treatment has demonstrated activity in this setting.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/therapy , Muscle, Skeletal/pathology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/diagnosis , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/secondary , Humans , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Spain , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
The goal of this article is to provide recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. The diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer is made by pathologic evaluation after transurethral resection. Recently, a molecular classification has been proposed. Staging of muscle-invasive bladder cancer must be done by computed tomography scans of the chest, abdomen and pelvis and classified on the basis of UICC system. Radical cystectomy and lymph node dissection are the treatment of choice. In muscle-invasive bladder cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be recommended in patients with good performance status and no renal function impairment. Although there is insufficient evidence for use of adjuvant chemotherapy, its use must be considered when neoadjuvant therapy had not been administered in high-risk patients. Multimodality bladder-preserving treatment in localized disease is an alternative in selected and compliant patients for whom cystectomy is not considered for clinical or personal reasons. In metastatic disease, the first-line treatment for patients must be based on cisplatin-containing combination. Vinflunine is the only drug approved for use in second line in Europe. Recently, immunotherapy treatment has demonstrated activity in this setting (AU)
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/complications , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/surgery , Gallbladder Neoplasms/complications , Gallbladder Neoplasms/surgery , Gallbladder Neoplasms , Muscle Neoplasms/complications , Muscle Neoplasms/therapy , Cystectomy/methods , Immunotherapy/methods , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Molecular Biology/methods , Neoplasm Staging/methods , PrognosisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic renal carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line pazopanib were not included in the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model. SPAZO (NCT02282579) was a nation-wide retrospective observational study designed to assess the effectiveness and validate the IMDC prognostic model in patients treated with first-line pazopanib in clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of 278 patients, treated with first-line pazopanib for mRCC in 34 centres in Spain, were locally recorded and externally validated. Mean age was 66 years, there were 68.3% male, 93.5% clear-cell type, 74.8% nephrectomized, and 81.3% had ECOG 0-1. Metastatic sites were: lung 70.9%, lymph node 43.9%, bone 26.3%, soft tissue/skin 20.1%, liver 15.1%, CNS 7.2%, adrenal gland 6.5%, pleura/peritoneum 5.8%, pancreas 5%, and kidney 2.2%. After median follow-up of 23 months, 76.4% had discontinued pazopanib (57.2% due to progression), 47.9% had received second-line targeted therapy, and 48.9% had died. RESULTS: According to IMDC prognostic model, 19.4% had favourable risk (FR), 57.2% intermediate risk (IR), and 23.4% poor risk (PR). No unexpected toxicities were recorded. Response rate was 30.3% (FR: 44%, IR: 30% PR: 17.3%). Median progression-free survival (whole population) was 11 months (32 in FR, 11 in IR, 4 in PR). Median and 2-year overall survival (whole population) were 22 months and 48.1%, respectively (FR: not reached and 81.6%, IR: 22 and 48.7%, PR: 7 and 18.8%). These estimations and their 95% confidence intervals are fully consistent with the outcomes predicted by the IMDC prognostic model. CONCLUSION: Our results validate the IMDC model for first-line pazopanib in mRCC and confirm the effectiveness and safety of this treatment.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell/drug therapy , Molecular Targeted Therapy , Prognosis , Pyrimidines/administration & dosage , Sulfonamides/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology , Databases, Factual , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Humans , Indazoles , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Pyrimidines/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Spain , Sulfonamides/adverse effectsABSTRACT
This review provides updated information published in 2014 regarding advances and major achievements in genitourinary cancer. Sections include the best in prostate cancer, renal cancer, bladder cancer, and germ cell tumors. In the field of prostate cancer, data related to treatment approach of hormone-sensitive disease, castrate-resistant prostate cancer, mechanisms of resistance, new drugs, and molecular research are presented. In relation to renal cancer, relevant aspects in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma, immunotherapy, and molecular research, including angiogenesis and von Hippel-Lindau gene, molecular biology of non-clear cell histologies, and epigenetics of clear renal cell cancer are described. New strategies in the management of muscle-invasive localized bladder cancer and metastatic disease are reported as well as salient findings of biomolecular research in urothelial cancer. Some approaches intended to improve outcomes in poor prognosis patients with metastatic germ cell cancer are also reported. Results of clinical trials in these areas are discussed.
Subject(s)
Urogenital Neoplasms/therapy , HumansABSTRACT
Androgen deprivation treatment is the current standard first-line treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. For several years, docetaxel was the only treatment with a proven survival benefit for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Since docetaxel became standard of care for men with symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), three treatment virtual spaces, for treatment and drug development in CPRC, have emerged: pre-docetaxel, docetaxel combinations and post-docetaxel. Sipuleucel-T, cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and radium-223 have been approved in the pre- or post-docetaxel setting in metastatic CRPC during the last few years. Patients are now living longer and experiencing better quality of life. Strategies for patient selection and treatment sequencing are therefore urgently require (AU)
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Androgens/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms/physiopathology , Prostatic Neoplasms , Castration/trendsABSTRACT
Androgen deprivation treatment is the current standard first-line treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. For several years, docetaxel was the only treatment with a proven survival benefit for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Since docetaxel became standard of care for men with symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), three treatment virtual spaces, for treatment and drug development in CPRC, have emerged: pre-docetaxel, docetaxel combinations and post-docetaxel. Sipuleucel-T, cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and radium-223 have been approved in the pre- or post-docetaxel setting in metastatic CRPC during the last few years. Patients are now living longer and experiencing better quality of life. Strategies for patient selection and treatment sequencing are therefore urgently required.