Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 23.378
Filtrar
1.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(17): e25630, 2021 Apr 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33907117

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT: Advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients are not tolerant to the toxicities of traditional chemotherapy and its second-line therapeutic regimens are limited. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apatinib combined with S-1 as the second-line therapy for AGC patients.Patients with AGC were enrolled in this study. Patients received oral apatinib (250 mg to 500 mg once daily) and S-1(40 mg/m2 twice daily) on days 1-14. Each cycle was 28 days and one course of treatment consisted of 2 cycles. Clinical efficacy and adverse events (AEs) were observed. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis.From November 2015 to December 2017, 58 AGC patients who failed first-line chemotherapy were enrolled and assessed retrospectively. According to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) standard, all patients were evaluable for response. None achieved CR, and 10 (17.2%) achieved PR (95% CI 7.2%-27.3%). SD was observed in 58.6% (34/58) of patients (95% CI 45.6%-71.7%) and NR in 24.1% (14/58) of patients (95% CI 12.8%-35.5%). The objective response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) were 17.2% and 75.8% respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 143.1 days (95% CI 121.7-164.5) and 211.6 days (95% CI 162.9-219.7) respectively. The multivariate analysis showed that the ECOG PS was the independent factor of PFS and OS for AGC patients (PFS: HR = 3.565, 95% CI: 2.25-5.65, P < .001; OS: HR = 3.676, 95% CI: 2.29-5.89, P < .001). The main AEs were fatigue (72.4%), hypertension (46.6%), and leukopenia (48.3%).Apatinib combined with S-1 showed promising efficiency and was well tolerated as the second-line therapy for AGC patients. ECOG PS was the independent factor of PFS and OS for AGC patients. AEs were moderate and controllable, and leukopenia or hypertension was predictable factors for the PFS and OS of AGC patients.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Ácido Oxónico/administración & dosificación , Piridinas/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Tegafur/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Combinación de Medicamentos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Criterios de Evaluación de Respuesta en Tumores Sólidos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Gástricas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Adulto Joven
2.
Cancer Treat Rev ; 96: 102177, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33798955

RESUMEN

A few months ago, results from two randomised phase III trials of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in locally advanced rectal cancer were presented (RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23), consistently showing better short- and long-term outcomes with TNT as compared with standard neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT). These results represent corroborating evidence in support of a practice that many centres had already implemented based on promising preliminary data. Also, they provide new, high-level evidence to endorse TNT as a new management option in the treatment algorithm of stage II-III rectal cancer in those centres where CRT and SCRT have long remained the only accepted standard neoadjuvant treatments. Having two consistently positive trials is certainly reassuring regarding the potential of TNT as a general treatment approach. Nevertheless, substantial differences between these trials pose important challenges in relation to the generalisability and applicability of their results, and translation of the same into practical clinical recommendations. In this article, we address a number of key questions that the RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23 trials have raised among the broad community of gastrointestinal oncologists, proposing an interpretation of the data that may help the decision making, and highlighting grey areas that warrant further investigation.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Recto/terapia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Capecitabina/administración & dosificación , Quimioradioterapia/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Compuestos Organoplatinos/administración & dosificación , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Neoplasias del Recto/patología
3.
Cancer Treat Rev ; 96: 102180, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33812339

RESUMEN

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive form of cancer with a dismal prognosis. The lack of symptoms in the early phase of the disease makes early diagnosis challenging, and about 80-85% of the patients are diagnosed only after the disease is locally advanced or metastatic. The current front-line treatment landscape in local stages comprises surgical resection and adjuvant chemotherapy. In Switzerland, although both FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel regimens are feasible and comparable in the first-line setting, FOLFIRINOX is preferred in the treatment of fit (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status [PS]: 0-1), young (<65 years old) patients with few comorbidities and normal liver function, while gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel is used to treat less fit (ECOG PS: 1-2) and more vulnerable patients. In the second-line setting of advanced PDAC, there is currently only one approved regimen, based on the phase III NAPOLI-1 trial. Furthermore, the use of liposomal-irinotecan in the second line is supported by real-world data. Beyond the standard of care, various alternative treatment modalities are being explored in clinical studies. Immunotherapy has demonstrated only limited benefits until now, and only in cases of high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). However, data on the benefit of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition as maintenance therapy in patients with germline BRCA-mutated tumors might signal of an advance in targeted therapy. Currently, there is a lack of molecular and genetic biomarkers for optimal stratification of patients and in guiding treatment decisions. Thus, identification of predictive and prognostic biomarkers and evaluating novel treatment strategies are equally relevant for improving the prognosis of metastatic pancreatic cancer patients.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Albúminas/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patología , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Irinotecán/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Liposomas/administración & dosificación , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
4.
J Surg Oncol ; 123(6): 1395-1404, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831247

RESUMEN

The annual incidence of pancreatic cancer is nearly 50,000 patients. The 5-year overall survival is only 9%, and there remains a great need for better therapy. A subset of these patients presents with locally advanced disease. Multidisciplinary therapy has evolved to include some combination of systemic chemotherapy, locoregional radiation, and surgery in select patients with excellent biology. This review will address the thoughtful evidence-based and individualized approach to these patients.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/terapia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Albúminas/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patología , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Quimioradioterapia , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Irinotecán/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Medicina de Precisión
5.
J Surg Oncol ; 123(6): 1449-1459, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831249

RESUMEN

Despite overall advances in cancer therapy, patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma continue to have a poor prognosis. While adjuvant therapy is still considered standard, there is mounting evidence that neoadjuvant therapy confers similar benefits in patients with locally advanced disease. The primary measures of response are radiographic, biochemical, margin status, and pathologic. Given overall low response rates and the need for new treatment strategies, standard metrics remain important to the investigation of new systemic agents.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/terapia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/diagnóstico por imagen , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Irinotecán/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía
6.
J Surg Oncol ; 123(6): 1441-1448, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831251

RESUMEN

Surgery remains the only curative intent treatment modality for localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Even in those who can undergo successful margin negative resection, the ability to deliver adjuvant chemotherapy is suboptimal for various reasons, resulting in poor outcomes. The delivery of "standard of care" intensive modern neoadjuvant therapies can be challenging in low to-middle-income countries (LMICs) with limited resource. This article reviews the constraints in delivering neoadjuvant therapies in LMICs and strategies to improve its implementation.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Irinotecán/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Radioterapia Ayuvante , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Centros de Atención Terciaria
7.
J Surg Oncol ; 123(6): 1405-1413, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831252

RESUMEN

Treatment of localized pancreatic cancer has also evolved to prioritize preoperative (neoadjuvant) multimodality therapy over a surgery-first approach. Given the complexities of pancreatic cancer staging and the challenge of delivering multiple treatment modalities (chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery), an experienced and highly integrated multidisciplinary team is necessary to achieve the best outcomes. In this review, we will discuss our institutional experience with neoadjuvant therapy, guiding principles for treatment, and outline the landscape for future investigations.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Irinotecán/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
8.
J Surg Oncol ; 123(6): 1432-1440, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831253
9.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(4): 450-462, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33794205

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiotherapy is the standard of care for unresected locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. We aimed to assess if addition of avelumab (anti-PD-L1) to chemoradiotherapy could improve treatment outcomes for this patient population. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, patients were recruited from 196 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 22 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, with histologically confirmed, previously untreated, locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx, hypopharynx, larynx, or oral cavity (unselected for PD-L1 status), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and who could receive chemoradiotherapy were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by means of stratified block randomisation with block size four (stratified by human papillomavirus status, tumour stage, and nodal stage, and done by an interactive response technology system) to receive 10 mg/kg avelumab intravenously every 2 weeks plus chemoradiotherapy (100 mg/m2 cisplatin every 3 weeks plus intensity-modulated radiotherapy with standard fractionation of 70 Gy [35 fractions during 7 weeks]; avelumab group) or placebo plus chemoradiotherapy (placebo group). This was preceded by a single 10 mg/kg avelumab or placebo lead-in dose given 7 days previously and followed by 10 mg/kg avelumab or placebo every 2 weeks maintenance therapy for up to 12 months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by investigator assessment per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, in all randomly assigned patients. Adverse events were assessed in patients who received at least one dose of avelumab or placebo. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02952586. Enrolment is no longer ongoing, and the trial has been discontinued. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2016, and Jan 29, 2019, from 907 patients screened, 697 patients were randomly assigned to the avelumab group (n=350) or the placebo group (n=347). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 14·6 months (IQR 8·5-19·6) in the avelumab group and 14·8 months (11·6-18·8) in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI 16·9 months-not estimable) in the avelumab group and not reached (23·0 months-not estimable) in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio 1·21 [95% CI 0·93-1·57] favouring the placebo group; one-sided p=0·92). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (57 [16%] of 348 patients in the avelumab group vs 52 [15%] of 344 patients in the placebo group), mucosal inflammation (50 [14%] vs 45 [13%]), dysphagia (49 [14%] vs 47 [14%]), and anaemia (41 [12%] vs 44 [13%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 124 (36%) patients in the avelumab group and in 109 (32%) patients in the placebo group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in two (1%) patients in the avelumab group (due to general disorders and site conditions, and vascular rupture) and one (<1%) in the placebo group (due to acute respiratory failure). INTERPRETATION: The primary objective of prolonging progression-free survival with avelumab plus chemoradiotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck was not met. These findings may help inform the design of future trials investigating the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus CRT. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeza y Cuello/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Antígeno B7-H1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Antígeno B7-H1/genética , Quimioradioterapia , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Alemania , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/genética , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/inmunología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Placebos/administración & dosificación , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeza y Cuello/genética , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeza y Cuello/inmunología , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeza y Cuello/patología , Nivel de Atención
10.
Anticancer Res ; 41(4): 2193-2195, 2021 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33813433

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND/AIM: Since January 2020, coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases have been confirmed in Japan, and the number of patients with COVID-19 has been increasing. Two emergency declarations have been made previously and one is currently in effect. Based on our experience of a situation that could affect cancer treatment, this study retrospectively examined the correlation between perioperative anticancer therapy and COVID-19 incidence in patients with breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent perioperative anticancer therapy for breast cancer at our hospital from February 2020 to February 2021 were included in this study. The presence or absence of COVID-19, timing of anticancer drug initiation, and clinical data were collected. RESULTS: No cases of COVID-19 were diagnosed in patients receiving perioperative anticancer therapy at our hospital. CONCLUSION: Regimen modification, active use of supportive care, and patient lifestyle were factors reducing the incidence of COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias de la Mama , Atención Perioperativa/métodos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Huésped Inmunocomprometido , Incidencia , Japón/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia Neoadyuvante/estadística & datos numéricos , Atención Perioperativa/efectos adversos , Atención Perioperativa/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , /fisiología
11.
Anticancer Res ; 41(4): 2157-2163, 2021 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33813427

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of biweekly trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride (TAS-102) with bevacizumab combination therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 19 patients with mCRC who received TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy biweekly as third-line chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 73 years and most (73.4%) were men. The median progression-free and overall survival were 5.6 and 11.5 months, respectively. Five (26.3%) patients achieved a response and the disease control rate was 12/19 (63.1%). One patient (5.2%) experienced neutropenia grade 3 or more. The median time from baseline performance status 0/1 to worsening to 2 or more was 10.3 months. CONCLUSION: Biweekly TAS-102 plus bevacizumab facilitates tumor shrinkage by reducing the incidence of grade 3 or more neutropenia, improving survival, and maintaining performance status. This combination may represent a treatment option for patients with late-stage mCRC receiving third- or later-line therapy.


Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Bevacizumab/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Pirrolidinas/administración & dosificación , Timina/administración & dosificación , Trifluridina/administración & dosificación , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Bevacizumab/efectos adversos , Neutropenia Febril Inducida por Quimioterapia/epidemiología , Neutropenia Febril Inducida por Quimioterapia/etiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/mortalidad , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Esquema de Medicación , Combinación de Medicamentos , Femenino , Humanos , Japón/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Pirrolidinas/efectos adversos , Análisis de Supervivencia , Timina/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Trifluridina/efectos adversos
12.
BMC Cancer ; 21(1): 249, 2021 Mar 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33685421

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The current standard postoperative treatment for stage II-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a regimen of platinum doublet adjuvant chemotherapy. These regimens, which are the same as for solid NSCLC tumors, often cause severe adverse reactions in the treated patients. Therefore, an effective treatment regimen with fewer side effects is needed. METHODS/DESIGN: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of S-1 monotherapy (80 mg/m2 orally administrated twice daily, at day 1-14, 16 cycles) and cisplatin with vinorelbine combination therapy (cisplatin 80 mg/m2 at day 1,vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 at day 1, 8, 4 cycles) in patients with II/IIIA stage non-small-cell lung cancer who underwent a total resection. In addition, we will also evaluate the level of treatment side effects by assessing quality of life (QOL), work productivity and activity performance. The primary endpoint is a 2-year relapse free survival (RFS) and the second primary endpoints are 2-year overall survival (OS), rate of treatment completion, safety, work productivity and activity, and quality of adjusted life years (QALY). At the same time, we aim to obtain precise information required to perform future phase 3 randomized controlled trials. The study is designed to estimate the primary endpoint with accuracy determined as the width of its 95% confidence interval to be less than 20%. Recruitment started in May 2017 and is ongoing. DISCUSSION: This study has been conceived to establish a superior regimen for completely resected NSCLC based on efficacy, safety and QOL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry number: UMIN000027435 . Registered May 22, 2017.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/terapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/terapia , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/epidemiología , Ácido Oxónico/administración & dosificación , Tegafur/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/mortalidad , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/patología , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Cisplatino/efectos adversos , Ensayos Clínicos Fase II como Asunto , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Combinación de Medicamentos , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/prevención & control , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Ácido Oxónico/efectos adversos , Neumonectomía , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Tegafur/efectos adversos , Vinorelbina/administración & dosificación , Vinorelbina/efectos adversos , Adulto Joven
13.
Ann Hematol ; 100(5): 1195-1202, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33661333

RESUMEN

We retrospectively collected clinical data on 31 relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML) patients who were treated with outpatient glasdegib and low-dose Cytarabine (LDAraC) at our institution. The median age was 67 years (45-86). The median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was 2 (1-3). The patients had previously received a median number of 2 (1-4) treatment lines, 61% (19/31) had been treated with intensive chemotherapy, 29% (9/31) had relapsed after allogeneic stem cell transplantation, and 45% (14/31) had had venetoclax exposure. Adverse cytogenetics were identified in 45% (14/31) of the cases. The CR + CRp rate was 21% (6/29) among evaluable patients. The median overall survival was 3.9 months for all patients. Different median overall survival times were observed in responders, patients achieving stable disease and those diagnosed with progressive disease: not reached vs 3.9 months vs 0.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001). The most common adverse events were pneumonia (29%, 9/31), sepsis (23%, 7/31), and febrile neutropenia (16%, 5/31). Glasdegib + LDAraC is a fairly safe, non-intensive, outpatient regimen inducing complete remission and resulting in prolonged survival in some R/R AML patients.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Bencimidazoles/uso terapéutico , Citarabina/uso terapéutico , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Compuestos de Fenilurea/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Bencimidazoles/administración & dosificación , Bencimidazoles/efectos adversos , Citarabina/administración & dosificación , Citarabina/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Compuestos de Fenilurea/administración & dosificación , Compuestos de Fenilurea/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
14.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(4): 499-511, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33676601

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab showed durable antitumour activity and manageable safety in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in the single-arm KEYNOTE-012 and KEYNOTE-086 trials. In this study, we compared pembrolizumab with chemotherapy for second-line or third-line treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS: KEYNOTE-119 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 150 medical centres (academic medical centres, community cancer centres, and community hospitals) in 31 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, with centrally confirmed metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, who had received one or two previous systemic treatments for metastatic disease, had progression on their most recent therapy, and had previous treatment with an anthracycline or taxane were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a block method (block size of four) and an interactive voice-response system with integrated web-response to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for 35 cycles (pembrolizumab group), or to single-drug chemotherapy per investigator's choice of capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine (60% enrolment cap for each; chemotherapy group). Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 tumour status (positive [combined positive score (CPS) ≥1] vs negative [CPS <1]) and history of previous neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment versus de-novo metastatic disease at initial diagnosis. Primary endpoints were overall survival in participants with a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of 10 or more, those with a CPS of 1 or more, and all participants; superiority of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy was tested in all participants only if shown in those with a CPS of one or more. The primary endpoint was analysed in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in the all-subjects-as-treated population. This Article describes the final analysis of the trial, which is now completed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02555657. FINDINGS: From Nov 25, 2015, to April 11, 2017, 1098 participants were assessed for eligibility and 622 (57%) were randomly assigned to receive either pembrolizumab (312 [50%]) or chemotherapy (310 [50%]). Median study follow-up was 31·4 months (IQR 27·8-34·4) for the pembrolizumab group and 31·5 months (27·8-34·6) for the chemotherapy group. Median overall survival in patients with a PD-L1 CPS of 10 or more was 12·7 months (95% CI 9·9-16·3) for the pembrolizumab group and 11·6 months (8·3-13·7) for the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·57-1·06]; log-rank p=0·057). In participants with a CPS of 1 or more, median overall survival was 10·7 months (9·3-12·5) for the pembrolizumab group and 10·2 months (7·9-12·6) for the chemotherapy group (HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·69-1·06]; log-rank p=0·073). In the overall population, median overall survival was 9·9 months (95% CI 8·3-11·4) for the pembrolizumab group and 10·8 months (9·1-12·6) for the chemotherapy group (HR 0·97 [95% CI 0·82-1·15]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (three [1%] patients in the pembrolizumab group vs ten [3%] in the chemotherapy group), decreased white blood cells (one [<1%] vs 14 [5%]), decreased neutrophil count (one [<1%] vs 29 [10%]), and neutropenia (0 vs 39 [13%]). 61 (20%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and 58 (20%) patients in the chemotherapy group had serious adverse events. Three (<1%) of 601 participants had treatment-related adverse events that led to death (one [<1%] in the pembrolizumab group due to circulatory collapse; two [1%] in the chemotherapy group, one [<1%] due to pancytopenia and sepsis and one [<1%] haemothorax). INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab did not significantly improve overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer versus chemotherapy. These findings might inform future research of pembrolizumab monotherapy for selected subpopulations of patients, specifically those with PD-L1-enriched tumours, and inform a combinatorial approach for the treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Antígeno B7-H1/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/efectos adversos , Antígeno B7-H1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/patología , Adulto Joven
15.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(4): 463-475, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33684370

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Results from a phase 2 trial of the TPEx chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel-platinum-cetuximab) showed promising results, with a median overall survival of 14·0 months in first-line recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the TPEx regimen with the standard of care EXTREME regimen (platinum-fluorouracil-cetuximab) in this setting. METHODS: This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial, done in 68 centres (cancer centres, university and general hospitals, and private clinics) in France, Spain, and Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic HNSCC unsuitable for curative treatment; had at least one measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or less. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using the TenAlea website by investigators or delegated clinical research associates to the TPEx regimen or the EXTREME regimen, with minimisation by ECOG performance status, type of disease evolution, previous cetuximab treatment, and country. The TPEx regimen consisted of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2, both intravenously on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (intravenously 400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently). Four cycles were repeated every 21 days with systematic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support at each cycle. In case of disease control after four cycles, intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m2 was continued every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The EXTREME regimen consisted of fluorouracil 4000 mg/m2 on day 1-4, cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently) all delivered intravenously. Six cycles were delivered every 21 days followed by weekly 250 mg/m2 cetuximab as maintenance therapy in case of disease control. G-CSF support was not mandatory per the protocol in the EXTREME regimen. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of chemotherapy or cetuximab. Enrolment is closed and this is the final analysis. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02268695. FINDINGS: Between Oct 10, 2014, and Nov 29, 2017, 541 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment regimens (271 to TPEx, 270 to EXTREME). Two patients in the TPEx group had major deviations in consent forms and were not included in the final analysis. Median follow-up was 34·4 months (IQR 26·6-44·8) in the TPEx group and 30·2 months (25·5-45·3) in the EXTREME group. At data cutoff, 209 patients had died in the TPEx group and 218 had died in the EXTREME group. Overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (median 14·5 months [95% CI 12·5-15·7] in the TPEx group and 13·4 months [12·2-15·4] in the EXTREME group; hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·23). 214 (81%) of 263 patients in the TPEx group versus 246 (93%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group had grade 3 or worse adverse events during chemotherapy (p<0·0001). In the TPEx group, 118 (45%) of 263 patients had at least one serious adverse event versus 143 (54%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group. 16 patients in the TPEx group and 21 in the EXTREME group died in association with adverse events, including seven patients in each group who had fatal infections (including febrile neutropenia). Eight deaths in the TPEx group and 11 deaths in the EXTREME group were assessed as treatment related, most frequently sepsis or septic shock (four in each treatment group). INTERPRETATION: Although the trial did not meet its primary endpoint, with no significant improvement in overall survival with TPEx versus EXTREME, the TPEx regimen had a favourable safety profile. The TPEx regimen could provide an alternative to standard of care with the EXTREME regimen in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC, especially for those who might not be good candidates for up-front pembrolizumab treatment. FUNDING: Merck Santé and Chugai Pharma.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Cetuximab/administración & dosificación , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeza y Cuello/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Docetaxel/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Francia/epidemiología , Alemania/epidemiología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/epidemiología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Platino (Metal)/administración & dosificación , España/epidemiología , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeza y Cuello/epidemiología , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeza y Cuello/patología
16.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(4): 439-449, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33705695

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The benefits of secondary cytoreduction for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer are still widely debated. We aimed to assess the efficacy of secondary cytoreduction plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in this patient population. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial (SOC-1), was done in four primarily academic centres in China (two in Shanghai, one in Hangzhou, and one in Guangzhou). Eligible patients were women aged 18 years and older with platinum-sensitive relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer with a platinum-free interval of at least 6 months after the end of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and were predicted to have potentially resectable disease according to the international model (iMODEL) score and PET-CT imaging. iMODEL score was calculated using six variables: International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, residual disease after primary surgery, platinum-free interval, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, serum level of cancer antigen 125 at recurrence, and presence of ascites at recurrence. An iMODEL score of 4·7 or lower predicted a potentially complete resection. As per a protocol amendment, patients with an iMODEL score of more than 4·7 could only be included if the serum level of cancer antigen 125 was more than 105 U/mL, but the principal investigators assessed the disease to be resectable by PET-CT. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via a permuted block design (block size of six) and stratified by study centre, iMODEL score, residual disease at primary surgery, and enrolment in the Shanghai Gynecologic Oncology Group SUNNY trial, to undergo secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by intravenous chemotherapy (six 3-weekly cycles of intravenous paclitaxel [175 mg/m2] or docetaxel [75 mg/m2] combined with intravenous carboplatin [area under the curve of 5 mg/mL per min]; surgery group) or intravenous chemotherapy alone (no surgery group). Primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment, regardless of treatment received (intention-to-treat [ITT] population). Here, we report the final analysis of progression-free survival and the prespecified interim analysis of overall survival. Safety was assessed in all participants who received their assigned treatment and had available adverse event data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01611766, and is ongoing but closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between July 19, 2012, and June 3, 2019, 357 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the surgery group (182) or the no surgery group (175; ITT population). Median follow-up was 36·0 months (IQR 18·1-58·3). In the no surgery group, 11 (6%) of 175 participants had secondary cytoreduction during second-line therapy while 48 (37%) of 130 participants who had disease progression crossed-over and had surgery at a subsequent recurrence. Median progression-free survival was 17·4 months (95% CI 15·0-19·8) in the surgery group and 11·9 months (10·0-13·8) in the no surgery group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·58; 95% CI 0·45-0·74; p<0·0001). At the interim overall survival analysis, median overall survival was 58·1 months (95% CI not estimable to not estimable) in the surgery group and 53·9 months (42·2-65·5) in the no surgery group (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·57-1·19). In the safety population, nine (5%) of 172 patients in the surgery group had grade 3-4 surgical morbidity at 30 days, and no patients in either group had died at 60 days after receiving assigned treatment. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events during chemotherapy were neutropenia (29 [17%] of 166 patients in the surgery group vs 19 [12%] of 156 patients in the no surgery group), leucopenia (14 [8%] vs eight [5%]), and anaemia (ten [6%] vs nine [6%]). Four serious adverse events occurred, all in the surgery group. No treatment-related deaths occurred in either group. INTERPRETATION: Secondary cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival than was chemotherapy alone in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer, and patients should be counselled about the option of secondary cytoreduction in specialised centres. Long-term survival outcomes will be assessed using mature data on overall survival. FUNDING: Zhongshan Development Program. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos de Citorreducción , Neoplasias Ováricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Ováricas/cirugía , Adulto , Anciano , Bevacizumab/administración & dosificación , Carboplatino/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Neoplasias Ováricas/patología , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Supervivencia sin Progresión
17.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(4): 525-537, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33721560

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite standard curative-intent treatment with neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by radical surgery in eligible patients, muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma has a high recurrence rate and no level 1 evidence for adjuvant therapy. We aimed to evaluate atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. METHOD: In the IMvigor010 study, a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 192 hospitals, academic centres, and community oncology practices across 24 countries or regions, patients aged 18 years and older with histologically confirmed muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2 were enrolled within 14 weeks after radical cystectomy or nephroureterectomy with lymph node dissection. Patients had ypT2-4a or ypN+ tumours following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or pT3-4a or pN+ tumours if no neoadjuvant chemotherapy was received. Patients not treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy must have been ineligible for or declined cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy. No post-surgical radiotherapy or previous adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a permuted block (block size of four) method and interactive voice-web response system to receive 1200 mg atezolizumab given intravenously every 3 weeks for 16 cycles or up to 1 year, whichever occurred first, or to observation. Randomisation was stratified by previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy use, number of lymph nodes resected, pathological nodal status, tumour stage, and PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who either received at least one dose of atezolizumab or had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02450331, and is ongoing but not recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Oct 5, 2015, and July 30, 2018, we enrolled 809 patients, of whom 406 were assigned to the atezolizumab group and 403 were assigned to the observation group. Median follow-up was 21·9 months (IQR 13·2-29·8). Median disease-free survival was 19·4 months (95% CI 15·9-24·8) with atezolizumab and 16·6 months (11·2-24·8) with observation (stratified hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·24). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were urinary tract infection (31 [8%] of 390 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 20 [5%] of 397 patients in the observation group), pyelonephritis (12 [3%]) vs 14 [4%]), and anaemia (eight [2%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 122 (31%) patients who received atezolizumab and 71 (18%) who underwent observation. 63 (16%) patients who received atezolizumab had a treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse event. One treatment-related death, due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, occurred in the atezolizumab group. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, IMvigor010 is the largest, first-completed phase 3 adjuvant study to evaluate the role of a checkpoint inhibitor in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improved disease-free survival in the atezolizumab group over observation. Atezolizumab was generally tolerable, with no new safety signals; however, higher frequencies of adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported than in metastatic urothelial carcinoma studies. These data do not support the use of adjuvant checkpoint inhibitor therapy in the setting evaluated in IMvigor010 at this time. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.


Asunto(s)
Antígeno B7-H1/genética , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales/tratamiento farmacológico , Músculos/patología , Urotelio/patología , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Antígeno B7-H1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Músculos/efectos de los fármacos , Invasividad Neoplásica/inmunología , Invasividad Neoplásica/patología , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Urotelio/efectos de los fármacos
18.
Ann Hematol ; 100(5): 1181-1194, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33740113

RESUMEN

This analysis from the phase II BRIGHT AML 1003 trial reports the long-term efficacy and safety of glasdegib + low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. The multicenter, open-label study randomized (2:1) patients to receive glasdegib + LDAC (de novo, n = 38; secondary acute myeloid leukemia, n = 40) or LDAC alone (de novo, n = 18; secondary acute myeloid leukemia, n = 20). At the time of analysis, 90% of patients had died, with the longest follow-up since randomization 36 months. The combination of glasdegib and LDAC conferred superior overall survival (OS) versus LDAC alone; hazard ratio (HR) 0.495; (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.325-0.752); p = 0.0004; median OS was 8.3 versus 4.3 months. Improvement in OS was consistent across cytogenetic risk groups. In a post-hoc subgroup analysis, a survival trend with glasdegib + LDAC was observed in patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia (HR 0.720; 95% CI 0.395-1.312; p = 0.14; median OS 6.6 vs 4.3 months) and secondary acute myeloid leukemia (HR 0.287; 95% CI 0.151-0.548; p < 0.0001; median OS 9.1 vs 4.1 months). The incidence of adverse events in the glasdegib + LDAC arm decreased after 90 days' therapy: 83.7% versus 98.7% during the first 90 days. Glasdegib + LDAC versus LDAC alone continued to demonstrate superior OS in patients with acute myeloid leukemia; the clinical benefit with glasdegib + LDAC was particularly prominent in patients with secondary acute myeloid leukemia. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01546038.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Bencimidazoles/uso terapéutico , Citarabina/uso terapéutico , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Compuestos de Fenilurea/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Bencimidazoles/administración & dosificación , Citarabina/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Primarias Secundarias/tratamiento farmacológico , Compuestos de Fenilurea/administración & dosificación , Análisis de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento
19.
Clin Drug Investig ; 41(4): 381-389, 2021 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33674955

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Atezolizumab is an anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody that shows good safety and efficacy for patients with PD-L1-positive triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The cost of atezolizumab therapy is expensive, and its economic burden is an important problem. In this study, we evaluated the cost effectiveness of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel therapy (AnP) compared with nab-paclitaxel monotherapy (nP) for PD-L1-positive TNBC under Japanese medical conditions and environments using a Markov model. METHODS: The medical information was collected from data published by the IMpassion130 trial. A Markov model was established to simulate the number of patients in each disease state after AnP or nP therapy during each time period. As indices for cost effectiveness, total cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was used to assess the uncertainty of the model using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations with difference parameters. RESULTS: The QALYs for AnP treatment were longer than for nP treatment (1.12 vs 0.82 QALYs), but the total cost of AnP treatment was more expensive than that of nP treatment (¥11,070,143 vs ¥2,056,164). The ICER values comparing AnP treatment with nP treatment were ¥30,208,143/QALY. The ICER/QALY was more expensive than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of ¥15,000,000 per QALY. To achieve a 50% cost-effective probability with a WTP threshold, the price of the atezolizumab should be reduced by 55.1%. CONCLUSIONS: AnP was not cost effective compared to nP for PD-L1-positive inoperable TNBC under the Japanese condition.


Asunto(s)
Albúminas/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economía , Antígeno B7-H1/metabolismo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Humanos , Japón , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida
20.
BMC Cancer ; 21(1): 300, 2021 Mar 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33757440

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients. METHODS: This nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and ≤ 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as ≤90 degrees arterial and ≤ 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36 Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3 years and 1.5 years follow-up. DISCUSSION: The PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Primary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17 . Date of registration: March 6, 2018. Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094 , NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Quimioradioterapia/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Desoxicitidina/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Irinotecán/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...