ABSTRACT
The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitors or other ICIs has significantly improved the prognosis for patients with mccRCC. This marks a major milestone in the treatment of mccRCC. Nonetheless, most patients will discontinue first-line therapy. In this narrative review, we analyze the different patterns of treatment discontinuation in the four pivotal phase III trials that have shown an improvement in overall survival in mccRCC first-line therapy, starting from 1 January 2017 to 1 June 2023. We highlight the different discontinuation scenarios and their influences on subsequent treatment options, aiming to provide more data to clinicians to navigate a complex decision-making process through a narrative review approach. We have identified several causes for discontinuations for patients treated with ICI-based combinations, such as interruption for drug-related adverse events, ICI treatment completion, treatment discontinuation due to complete response or maximum clinical benefit, or due to progression (pseudoprogression, systemic progression, and oligoprogression); for each case, an extensive analysis of the trials and current medical review has been conducted.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) dramatically changed. PEACE-1 and ARASENS trials established triplet therapy efficacy. Identifying prognostic factors supporting treatment choice is pivotal. METHODS: TEAM is an observational, retrospective study to evaluate prognostic role of variables in mHSPC patients receiving upfront docetaxel in 11 Italian centers. Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS). RESULTS: From September 2014 to December 2020, 147 patients were included. Median PFS and OS were 11.6 and 37.4 months. At univariate analysis, PFS-related variables were Gleason Score (GS) (P = .001), opioid use (P = .004), bone metastases number (P < .001), baseline PSA (P = .006), Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .002), time between ADT and docetaxel start (P = .018), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001), and number of docetaxel cycles (P < .001). OS-related variables were PSA at diagnosis (P = .024), primary tumor treatment (P = .022), baseline pain (P = .015), opioid use (P < .001), bone metastases number (P < . 001), baseline Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .001), NLR ratio (P = .039), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001) and docetaxel cycles number (P < .001). At multivariate analysis, independent prognostic variables were GS, opioid use, baseline LDH and time between ADT and docetaxel initiation for PFS, and baseline Hb and LDH for OS. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving upfront docetaxel with high GS, high disease burden, pain or opioid use, baseline unfavorable laboratory values had worse outcomes. Patients had greater docetaxel benefit when initiated early after ADT start. These parameters could be taken into account when selecting candidates for triplet therapy.
Subject(s)
Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Docetaxel , Retrospective Studies , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Pain/etiology , HormonesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Hospital admission (HA) in cancer history is a common, repeated and frequently unplanned event. The emergency departments (EDs) and the oncological outpatient service (OOS) are the ordinary way of entry. We studied the reasons of admission, pathways of access and discharge and prognostic factors in a population of admitted patients with cancer. METHODS: The health records of the admitted patients in the oncological ward of a referral hospital in a 6-month period were retrieved and analysed. The characteristics of those admitted in the last 3 months of life were compared with the other group. RESULTS: Among the 147 HA, 79.5% were unplanned, 48.9% passing through the ED and 30.6% through the OOS; 56.5% were due to cancer-related symptoms; 50.3% occurred in the last 3 months of life. Median overall survival was 90 days (95% IC 53.1-126.9). Independent prognostic factors for survival were: being admitted for symptoms, referral through the ED and not being discharged at home. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital is a turning point in the cancer care pathway. Patients needing HA have a dismal prognosis, half of them being in the last 3 months of life. This group can be identified using universally available variables.
ABSTRACT
Safety data regarding BNT162b2 in cancer patients (CPs) are scarce. Herein we report the side effects (SEs), the adverse events (AEs), and the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following BNT162b2 administration in CPs treated at the San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital. All CPs who agreed to participate in our vaccination campaign received BNT162b2 and were included in the descriptive analysis. An anonymous questionnaire investigating the occurrence of SEs/AEs and PROs was administered to the study population 21 days after the first dose. Pearson's chi-squared test was used to estimate the risk of experiencing SEs/AEs according to selected variables. A total of 997 patients were included in the study: 62.0% had stage IV cancer, and 68.8% were receiving an active treatment, of whom 15.9% were receiving immunotherapy. SEs/AEs were recorded in 37.1% of cases after the first dose and in 48.5% of cases after the second dose. The most common SEs were muscle pain/local rash (27.9% and 28%, after the first and second dose, respectively). Patients older than 70 years showed lower risk of SEs/AEs, while women showed a higher risk. Before receiving the vaccine, 18.2% of patients felt fearful and/or insecure about the vaccination. After the first dose, 57.5% of patients changed their feelings positively. Our data support the short-term safety of BNT162b2 in CPs, regardless of disease stage and concurrent treatments. Overall, the vaccination showed a positive impact on quality of life.
ABSTRACT
Prostate cancer (PC) is a hormone-sensitive tumor. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the cornerstone of systemic therapy for patients with intermediate or high-risk localized, recurrent, and metastatic prostate cancer. Although generally well tolerated, ADT can lead to short- and long-term adverse events that can worsen the quality of life of patients with PC. In the last decade, the introduction of novel generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) has resulted in an improvement in the prognosis of patients with metastatic PC when used in combination with ADT. The use of ARPI in increasingly early stages of the disease determines a longer exposure of patients to these treatments. Although ARPIs are normally well-tolerated drugs, they generally cause an increase in toxicity compared to ADT alone, being able to worsen some adverse events already induced by ADT or leading to the development of specific side effects. Although there are no specific treatments for all the adverse events induced by hormonal therapies, it is essential to know the possible toxicities induced by the different treatments and to start procedures to prevent and/or recognize and consequently treat them early in order to not compromise the quality of life of the patients with PC. The aim of this review is to describe the adverse events induced by hormonal therapies. We will first describe the side effects induced by both ADT and ARPI and then the specific adverse events of the different ARPIs. Furthermore, we will try to highlight the possible therapeutic options to prevent or mitigate the toxicity induced by hormone therapies in order to improve the quality of life of the patients with PC.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Radium 223 (Ra-223) was approved for the treatment of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with bone-only disease, following demonstration of significant improvement in overall survival (OS). To date, there are no validated prognostic factors useful in predicting outcome of mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223. Our retrospective study aims to evaluate the prognostic role of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events in mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223, and to identify which factors correlate with the toxicity onset. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all consecutive mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223 from September 2013 to December 2019 at our institute. Patients were divided in 2 groups according to the reason of Ra-223 therapy discontinuation: toxicity versus other causes. Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. RESULTS: In the overall population (75 patients) median PFS and OS were 5.46 months and 11.15 months respectively. Patients who discontinued treatment due to toxicity had a lower median PFS (3.49 vs 5.89 months, HR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.14-3.12, p = 0.014) and OS (8.59 vs 14.7 months HR: 3.33, 95% CI: 1.85-6.01, p < 0.001) than patients who discontinued therapy due to other causes. The risk of Ra-223 discontinuation due to toxicity correlates with the number of previous treatments (p = 0.002), previous chemotherapy treatment (p = 0.039), baseline LDH (p = 0.012), Hb (p = 0.021) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation due to toxicity is associated with worse outcomes in mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223. To reduce the risk of developing toxicities that may compromise treatment efficacy, Ra-223 should be used early in mCRPC patients.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Radium , Male , Humans , Radium/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/radiotherapy , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Urothelial cancer is a lethal malignancy characterized by a wide diffusion in Western countries due to a larger exposure to known risk factors, such as aromatic amines, tobacco smoke and benzene [...].
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/chemically induced , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/complications , Precision Medicine , Smoke/adverse effects , Nicotiana , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/etiology , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
Significant progress has been achieved over the last decades in understanding the biology and mechanisms of tumor progression in urothelial carcinoma (UC). Although the therapeutic landscape has dramatically changed in recent years with the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors, advanced UC is still associated with rapidly progressing disease and poor survival. The increasing knowledge of the pathogenesis and molecular pathways underlying cancer development and progression is leading the introduction of target therapies, such as the recently approved FGFR inhibitor Erdafitinib, or the anti-nectin 4 antibody drug-conjugate Enfortumab vedotin. Antibody drug conjugates represent an innovative therapeutic approach that allows the combination of a tar get-specific monoclonal antibody covalently conjugated via a linker to a cytotoxic agent (payload). UC is a perfect candidate for this therapeutic approach since it is particularly enriched in antigen expression on its surface and each specific antigen can represent a potential therapeutic target. In this review we summarize the mechanism of action of ADCs, their applications in localized and metastatic UC, the main mechanisms of resistance, and future perspectives for their use in clinical practice.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Immunoconjugates , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Antineoplastic Agents/pharmacology , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Humans , Immunoconjugates/pharmacology , Immunoconjugates/therapeutic use , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapyABSTRACT
Personalized treatment based on driver molecular alterations, such as ALK rearrangement, has revolutionized the therapeutic management of advanced oncogene-addicted NSCLC patients. Multiple effective ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), with the amelioration of the activity at central nervous system level, are now available, leading to substantial prognosis improvement. The exposure to TKIs triggers resistance mechanisms and the sequential administration of other TKIs and chemotherapy is, for the most part, not targeted. In this context, extending the benefit deriving from precision medicine is paramount, above all, when disease progression occurs in a limited number of sites. Retrospective data indicate that, in oligoprogressive disease, targeted therapy beyond progression combined with definitive local treatment of the progressing site(s) is an effective alternative. In these cases, a multidisciplinary approach becomes essential for an integrated treatment strategy, depending on the site of disease progression, in order to improve not only survival, but also quality of life. In this review we provide an updated and comprehensive overview of the main treatment strategies in cases of ALK rearranged oligoprogression, including systemic treatment as well as local therapy, and report a real-world clinical story, with the final aim of identifying the most promising management for this subset of patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Our study aims to identify baseline prognostic factors in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with radium-223. METHODS: Data about demographics, ECOG performance status, lymph node (LN) involvement, local treatment for prostate cancer, previous systemic treatments, cells blood count, PSA, ALP, albumin, LDH, bone protecting agents use (BPA), analgesic use and survival were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Seventy-five men received radium-223 between September 2013 and December 2019. Median age was 73 years. Thirty-four (45.3%) had ECOG PS 0, 41 (54.7%) PS 1-2. In univariable analysis, LN involvement (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.01-2.80, P=0.047), absence of local treatment on primary tumor (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.13-3.29, P=0.016), baseline strong opioidsuse (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.08-3.06, P=0.024), high platelets to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06-3.45, P=0.03), high baseline ALP (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.10-2.99, P=0.019) and high baseline LDH (HR 3.86,95% CI 2.01-7.41, P<0.001) were significantly associated with worst OS. At multivariable analysis, LN involvement, strong opioids use, baseline ALP, LDH and PLR levels were significantly associated with outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRPC patients treated with Radium-223, baseline ALP, LDH, strong opioid use, PLR, LN involvement and treatment on primary site are associated with different OS.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Radium , Male , Humans , Aged , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/radiotherapy , Retrospective Studies , Prognosis , Radium/therapeutic useABSTRACT
The advent of high-throughput sequencing has allowed to profoundly interrogate the molecular landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the last years. These findings constitute the opportunity to better stratify these patients in order to address specific treatments to well-defined oncogene-restricted subgroups. Among them, BRAF-mutated lung cancers represent around 4% of NSCLC, thus identifying a clinically relevant population that should be aptly managed. Pivotal phase II trials have demonstrated the efficacy of combinatorial treatment - dabrafenib plus trametinib, targeting both BRAF and MEK - for patients harboring V600E mutations, making this specific BRAF alteration a mandatory requirement in the genetic portrait of advanced non-squamous lung cancer patients. However, around half of BRAF+ NSCLC patients remain orphan of targeted approaches. Here we review the available evidence, mainly from a clinical perspective, of therapeutic strategies for both V600E and non-V600 patients, in terms of small molecule, immune checkpoint inhibitors and forthcoming integrated strategies. Looking at on-going clinical trials, a special attention is dedicated to emergent molecules and combinatorial strategies that not only will improve outcomes of classical V600E, but also will make concrete the chance of tailored treatments for the majority of BRAF-mutated patients.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Molecular Targeted Therapy/methods , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/genetics , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , Immunotherapy/methods , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Mutation , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/antagonists & inhibitors , Vemurafenib/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: COVID-19 cancer patients (C19-CP) represent a population at high risk for mortality, whose clinical characteristics are still unknown in the second SARS-CoV-2 wave. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare epidemiology and clinical presentation of C19-CP referring to the emergency department (ED) of our institution (San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Italy), in a 3-week observation period of the first and second COVID-19 waves, starting from the introduction of the corresponding national lockdowns. METHODS: We retrieved ED admissions from March 9 to 29, 2020, for the first wave, and from October 24 to November 13, 2020, for the second wave. We collected clinical characteristics of consecutive patients with molecularly confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also considered untested or SARS-CoV-2-negative cancer patients referring to the ED in the reference time frames. RESULTS: C19-CP in the second wave exceeded those in the first wave despite the nonsignificant difference (39 of 576 v 8 of 163; P = .5). Compared with nononcological patients, C19-CP were older (median age 70 years [interquartile range 61-77] v 60 years [interquartile range 45-73]; P = .02) and presented more often with ≥ 2 comorbidities (40.4% v 24.3%; P = .02). Compared with nononcological patients, in C19-CP, respiratory failure (29 of 47 v 321 of 692; P = .049) and hospitalization (37 of 47 v 363 of 692; P = .0004) were higher, with comparable frequencies across the waves. Five of 24 and 10 of 27 hospitalized cancer patients in the first and second waves developed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSION: C19-CP were a vulnerable population, irrespective of the COVID-19 waves. This highlights the need to prioritize vaccinations in oncological patients to safeguard and guarantee optimal anticancer care.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Aged , Communicable Disease Control , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hospitals, University , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Obesity represents a well-known risk factor for renal cell carcinoma development. Several studies evaluated the relationship between obesity and outcome in patients with non-metastatic and metastatic renal cell carcinoma using different parameters such as BMI, visceral fat area and s.c. fat area. These studies suggest that obesity is associated with a better prognosis in renal cell carcinoma patients. This phenomenon is called obesity paradox and it was found in other diseases in which obesity represents an established risk factor such as heart failure, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, hypertension and coronary heart disease. The purpose of this review is to analyze the mechanisms by which obesity increases the risk of renal cell carcinoma development, to describe the evidence available to date about the link obesity-outcome and to evaluate the mechanisms to explain this apparently paradoxical relationship.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell , Kidney Neoplasms , Adipose Tissue , Body Mass Index , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/etiology , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology , Humans , Kidney Neoplasms/etiology , Kidney Neoplasms/pathology , Obesity/complications , Obesity/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) are markers of systemic inflammation associated with poor outcome in several solid tumors. We retrospectively investigated the prognostic role of PLR and, secondly, NLR in mCRPC patients treated with abiraterone acetate (AA) or Enzalutamide (E), both in pre- and postdocetaxel setting. METHODS: Two hundred twenty-five mCRPC patients treated with AA or E with basal blood count were divided in three groups according to PLR (PLR1<128; PLR2 128-190; PLR>190) and in two groups according to NLR (<3 vs. ≥3). Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: One hundred ten patients were in PLR1, 58 in PLR2 and 57 in PLR3. Median OS was 22.0, 20.6 and 21.2 months in PLR1, PLR2 and PLR3 (PLR2 vs. PLR1: HR 0.97, 95%CI 0.62-1.52, P=0.90; PLR3 vs. PLR1: HR 1.37, 95%CI 0.90-2.08, P=0.14). Median PFS was 9.2, 12.7 and 8.5 months in PLR1, PLR2 and PLR3 (PLR2 vs. PLR1: HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.59-1.27, P=0.47; PLR3 vs. PLR1: HR 1.15, 95%CI 0.80-1.66, P=0.45). 142 patients were in NLR<3 and 83 in NLR≥3. Median OS was 26.5 months in NLR<3 and 17.0 months in NLR≥3 (HR 1.75, 95%CI 1.22-2.51, P=0.02). Median PFS was 10.1 months in NLR<3 and 7.6 months in NLR≥3 (HR 1.37, 95%CI 1.00-1.88, P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis of mCRPC patients treated with AA or E we did not identify a prognostic role of baseline PLR, while we found a significant prognostic role of baseline NLR.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Androstenes , Benzamides , Humans , Lymphocytes , Male , Neutrophils , Nitriles , Phenylthiohydantoin , Prognosis , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Our retrospective study aims to evaluate the prognostic role of duration of response to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with enzalutamide (E) or abiraterone acetate (AA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data about ADT start and duration were available in 255 (82%) of 311 patients treated with AA or E. Patients were divided in three groups according to ADT response (group 1 [G1]: <12 months; group 2 [G2]: 12-36 months; group 3 [G3]: >36 months). Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Patients with longer ADT response had better OS (median 17.3 months G1, 19.9 months G2, 31.6 months G3; HR G3 vs G1 0.41, 95% CI 0.25-0.64; p = 0.001) and better PFS (median 5.9 months G1, 8.8 months G2, 11.7 months G3; HR G3 vs G1 0.41, 95% CI 0.41-0.27; p < 0001). In docetaxel-naive patients, median OS was 18.8 in G1, 35.2 in G2, and not reached in G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.78; p = 0.038), median PFS was 7 months G1, 9.3 months G2, and 20 months G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.62; p = 0.003). In postdocetaxel patients, median OS was 13.1 months in G1, 17.2 months in G2, and 21.4 months in G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.94; p = 0.082), while median PFS was 5.2 months in G1, 6.8 months in G2, and 8.3 months in G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.91; p = 0.067). CONCLUSIONS: Duration of ADT response is an independent prognostic factor of outcome with AA or E.
Subject(s)
Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/mortality , Abiraterone Acetate/administration & dosage , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Benzamides/administration & dosage , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nitriles/administration & dosage , Phenylthiohydantoin/administration & dosage , Prognosis , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Aim: Since SARS-CoV-2 infection rapidly spread around the world, Italy has quickly become one of the most affected countries. Healthcare systems introduced strict infection control measures to ensure optimal care, especially in frail groups such as cancer patients (pts). This study investigated the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 pre-procedure screening and whether COVID-19 influenced timely diagnosis and therapy. Methods: Data of oncological procedures of pts with confirmed or suspected cancer diagnosis, treated at Oncology Department or coming from Emergency Department of San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital between June 2020 and March 2021 were retrospectively collected. A nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) was performed in outpatients 24/48 h before procedures. Inpatients were tested by NPS before and after hospitalization. Results: Two hundred and twenty-one pts were included in this analysis. Median age was 73 years, males were 58%. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status was 0 or 1 in 88% of pts. The most frequent cancer type was lung cancer (57%). Stages IV were 77%. Two hundred and forty-three scheduled procedures were performed with diagnostic (n: 142; 58%), therapeutic (n: 55; 23%), and palliative (n: 46; 19%) intent. One hundred and four and 139 procedures were performed in out- and in-pts, respectively. Of the 234 NPS performed, 10 (4%) were positive. Two pts were infected during hospitalization, 8 in community. Most of them were asymptomatic, while only 2 had mild symptoms. Eight procedures (3%) were postponed, 1 cancelled, while 2 were performed in positive pts. Median time to resolution of the infection was 17 days (11-36). Median delay in the procedures was 25 days (14-55). Five pts started systemic treatment, after a median time of 37.5 days (13-57). Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 infection led to the postponement of a small, but not negligible percentage of oncological procedures. However, the low infection rate observed suggests that structured screening for COVID-19 is critical for the best management of scheduled procedures during pandemic.
ABSTRACT
In last years several improvements have been made in the management of prostate cancer (PCa). Androgen receptor (AR) is considered the main driver in PCa growth and progression and most drugs are directed against AR pathway. Once PCa spreads outside the prostate, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) represents the cornerstone of treatment in hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC). Unfortunately, the response is only transient and most patients eventually develop castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Most resistance mechanisms depend on maintenance of AR signalling in castration environment. Recent discoveries of multiple growth-promoting and survival pathways in PCa suggest the importance of alternative mechanisms involved in disease progression, such as DNA damage response pathway, PTEN/PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, cell cycle pathway, WNT pathway, TMPRSS2/ETS fusion, neuroendocrine pattern and immune system response. In this review, we discuss the interplay between AR signaling and other molecular pathways involved in PCa pathogenesis and their therapeutic implication in advanced disease.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Receptors, Androgen , Androgen Antagonists , Disease Progression , Humans , Male , Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/genetics , Receptors, Androgen/geneticsABSTRACT
Testosterone suppression by androgen deprivation therapy is the cornerstone of prostate cancer treatment. New-generation hormone therapies improved overall survival in castration-resistant prostate cancer. More recent trials showed a further increase in overall survival when enzalutamide or abiraterone are associated with androgen deprivation therapy in hormone-sensitive disease. However, a higher clonal pressure may lead to the upregulation of alternative pathways for cancer progression and to dedifferentiated diseases that would probably respond poorly to subsequent treatments. In this contest, new strategies that could be able to delay or even revert resistance are needed. The bipolar androgen therapy is an under-investigation treatment that consists in periodical oscillation between castration levels and supraphysiological levels of testosterone in order to prevent the adaptation of prostate cancer cells to a low-androgen environment. This review aims to underline the biological rationale of bipolar androgen therapy and gather evidences from the most recent clinical trials.