Antibody-Drug Conjugates in the Treatment of Genitourinary Cancers: An Updated Review of Data.

The treatment landscape of genitourinary cancers has significantly evolved over the past few years. Renal cell carcinoma, bladder cancer, and prostate cancer are the most common genitourinary malignancies. Recent advancements have produced new targeted therapies, particularly antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), due to a better understanding of the underlying oncogenic factors and molecular mechanisms involved. ADCs function as a 'drug delivery into the tumor' system. They are composed of an antigen-directed antibody linked to a cytotoxic drug that releases cytotoxic components after binding to the tumor cell's surface antigen. ADCs have been proven to be extremely promising in the treatment of several cancer types. For GU cancers, this novel treatment has only benefited patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). The rest of the GU cancer paradigm does not have any FDA-approved ADC treatment options available yet. In this study, we have thoroughly completed a narrative review of the current literature and summarized preclinical studies and clinical trials that evaluated the utility, activity, and toxicity of ADCs in GU cancers, the prospects of ADC development, and the ongoing clinical trials. Prospective clinical trials, retrospective studies, case reports, and scoping reviews were included.

Implementation of targeted screening for poverty in a large primary care team in Toronto, Canada: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Poverty has a significant influence on health. Efforts to optimize income and reduce poverty could make a difference to the lives of patients and their families. Routine screening for poverty in primary care is an important first step but rarely occurs in Canada. We aimed to implement a targeted screening and referral process in a large, distributed primary care team in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The main outcome was the proportion of targeted patients screened. METHODS: This implementation evaluation was conducted with a large community-based primary care team in north Toronto. The primary care team serves relatively wealthy neighborhoods with pockets of poverty. Physicians were invited to participate. We implemented targeted screening by combining census information on neighborhood-level deprivation with postal codes in patient records. For physicians agreeing to participate, we added prompts to screen for poverty to the charts of adult patients living in the most deprived areas. Standardized electronic medical record templates recommended a referral to a team case worker for income optimization, for those patients screening positive. We recorded the number and percentages of participants at each stage, from screening to receiving advice on income optimization. RESULTS: 128 targeted patients with at least one visit (25%) were screened. The primary care team included 86 physicians distributed across 19 clinical locations. Thirty-four physicians (39%) participated. Their practices provided care for 27,290 patients aged 18 or older; 852 patients (3%) were found to be living in the most deprived neighborhoods. 509 (60%) had at least one office visit over the 6 months of follow up. 25 patients (20%) screened positive for poverty, and 13 (52%) were referred. Eight patients (62% of those referred) were ultimately seen by a caseworker for income optimization. CONCLUSIONS: We implemented a targeted poverty screening program combined with resources to optimize income for patients in a large, distributed community-based primary care team. Screening was feasible; however, only a small number of patients were linked to the intervention Further efforts to scale and spread screening and mitigation of poverty are warranted; these should include broadening the targeted population beyond those living in the most deprived areas.