Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Front Oncol ; 13: 1108937, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37077831

ABSTRACT

Background: Abiraterone acetate (ABI) and Enzalutamide (ENZA) are second-generation hormone drugs that show breakthrough activity in post-chemotherapy, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The leading oncological and urological guidelines indicate both drugs with the same strong recommendation. There is a lack of randomized trials which compare the efficacy of ABI and ENZA. The current study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the drugs with an analysis of prognostic factors related to those drugs. Patients and methods: The study included 420 patients with docetaxel (DXL) pretreated mCRPC from seven Polish cancer centers. Patients were treated according to inclusion and exclusion criteria in the Polish national drug program (1000 mg ABI and 10 mg prednisone, n=76.2%; ENZA, 160 mg; n=23.8%). The study retrospectively analyzed the overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF), PSA 50% decline rate (PSA 50%) and selected clinic-pathological data. Results: In the study group, the median OS was 17 months (95% CI: 15.6-18.3). The median OS (26.1 vs. 15.7 mo.; p<0.001), TTF (14.2 vs. 7.6 mo.; p<0.001) and PSA 50% (87.5 vs. 56%; p<0.001) were higher in ENZA than in ABI treatment. Multivariate analysis shows that ENZA treatment and PSA nadir <17.35 ng/mL during or after DXL treatment were related to longer TTF. ENZA treatment, DXL dose ≥750 mg, PSA nadir <17.35 ng/mL during or after DXL treatment was related to longer OS. Conclusions: ENZA treatment may be related to more favorable oncological outcomes than ABI treatment in the studied Polish population of patients. A 50% decline in PSA is an indicator of longer TTF and OS. Due to the non-randomized and retrospective nature of the analysis, the current results require prospective validation.

2.
Eur J Cancer ; 178: 234-242, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36371305

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: On 24th of February 2022, Ukrainian cancer patients had to face a new war. Here we describe an experience of the Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology Branch Krakow in providing cancer care for Ukrainian refugees during the initial 6 weeks of war. We present patients' characteristic, point out the main challenges and share initiatives undertaken. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this cross-sectional analysis, we have gathered demographic and clinical data together with date of crossing the Polish-Ukrainian border for 112 Ukrainian refugees with cancer who had their first-time oncology consultation between 24th February and 8th April 2022. We have also implemented national guidelines and created local procedures, interventions and policies to manage this situation. RESULTS: The peak of patient inflow was the third week of War and refugees accounted for 13% of all first-time patients within that period of time. The majority of refugees were women (86%), treated radically (57%) with breast cancer (43%). Most of the patients required systemic treatment (67%). Amongst the main challenges at the time were differences in the reimbursement system, communication issues, lack of patients' documentation or tissue samples, prolonged diagnostic or treatment interruptions, increased risk of COVID-19 infections, chemotherapy side effects, and lack of procedures. Legal, procedural and organizational steps implemented at the local and national level were described. CONCLUSIONS: The Russian invasion on Ukraine forced an unexpectedly high number of Ukrainian cancer patients to seek help abroad, leading to the straining of the health care system in Poland.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Refugees , Female , Humans , Male , Cross-Sectional Studies , Neoplasms/therapy , Poland
3.
J Clin Med ; 11(8)2022 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35456332

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Currently, limited data on targeted therapy and immunotherapy sequencing in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma is available. Targeted therapy and immunotherapy are expected to be comparable in terms of overall survival (OS) when used as second-line therapies; therefore, understanding the characteristics of patients who completed sequential treatment is needed. METHODS: The primary objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of BRAFi/MEKi activity as second-line therapy in patients with advanced melanoma. We also aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with advanced melanoma who were treated sequentially with immunotherapy and targeted therapy. We enrolled 97 patients treated between 1st December 2015 and 31st December 2020 with first-line immunotherapy with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitors; and for the second-line treatment with at least one cycle of BRAFi/MEKi therapy with follow-up through 31 January 2022. RESULTS: Median OS since first-line treatment initiation was 19.9 months and 12.8 months since initiation of BRAFi/MEKi treatment. All BRAFi/MRKi combinations were similarly effective. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.5 months since initiation of any BRAFi/MEKi treatment. CONCLUSIONS: BRAFi/MEKi therapy is effective in the second-line in advanced and metastatic melanoma patients. For the first time, the efficacy of all BRAFi/MEKi combinations as second-line therapy is shown.

4.
Immunotherapy ; 13(4): 297-307, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33353420

ABSTRACT

Aim: To evaluate treatment results in advanced/metastatic melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in routine practice in oncology centers in Poland. Methods: Multicenter retrospective analysis included 499 patients with unresectable/metastatic (stage IIIC-IV) melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 in first-line therapy. Results: Estimated median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 19.9 and 7.9 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis confirmed that ECOG 0, no brain metastases, normal lactate dehydrogenase level and occurrence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were statistically significantly associated with improved OS and PFS. Any irAE occurred in 24% of patients. Grade 3 or Grade 4 irAEs occurred in 6% of patients. Conclusion: Analysis revealed a slightly worse OS in real-world treatment in comparison to clinical trials (KEYNOTE-006 and CheckMate 066). Polish population treatment results are similar to other studies of real-world data. PFS and ORR are similar in our research and clinical trials.


Subject(s)
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Melanoma/drug therapy , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Female , Humans , Immunotherapy , Male , Melanoma/mortality , Melanoma/pathology , Middle Aged , Nivolumab/therapeutic use , Poland , Prognosis , Progression-Free Survival , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate , Treatment Outcome
5.
Contemp Oncol (Pozn) ; 19(2): 87-92, 2015.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26034384

ABSTRACT

A constant increase in occurrence of neoplasms is observed; hence new methods of therapy are being intensively researched. One of the methods of antineoplastic treatment is molecular targeted therapy, which aims to influence individual processes occurring in cells. Using this type of medications is associated with unwanted effects resulting from the treatment. Liver damage is a major adverse effect diagnosed during targeted therapy. Drug-induced liver damage can occur as necrosis of hepatocytes, cholestatic liver damage and cirrhosis. Hepatotoxicity is evaluated on the basis of International Consensus Criteria. Susceptibility of the liver to injury is connected not only with toxicity of the used medications but also with metastasis, coexistence of viral infections or other chronic diseases as well as the patient's age. It has been proven that in most cases the liver injury is caused by treatment with multikinase inhibitors, in particular tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ordered the inclusion of additional labels - so-called "black box warnings" - indicating increased risk of liver injury when treating with pazopanib, sunitinib, lapatinib and regorafenib. A meta-analysis published in 2013 showed that treating neoplastic patients with tyrosine kinase inhibitors can increase the risk of drug-induced liver damage at least twofold. Below the mechanisms of drug-induced liver injury and hepatotoxic effects of molecular targeted therapy are described.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...