The role of multidisciplinary team and molecular tumor board in the treatment of a patient with lung cancer.

Nowadays, selection of appropriate therapy in patients with lung cancer is based on comprehensive molecular characteristics of their tumors. On molecular level, lung cancer is one of the best described solid tumors. Currently, there are already methods in routine clinical practice that enable a relatively quick, accurate and cost-effective analysis of dozens of genes and thus make it possible to determine a complex molecular characteristic of a tumor. This creates new possibilities to tailor the treatment to the patients to achieve long-term survival with a good quality of life. New technologies bring more and more information and to transform it into the best clinical benefit for the patient can be challenging. This is a place for the multidisciplinary approach in the form of a molecular tumor board. Its role is to try to indicate appropriate therapy based on the identified genetic alteration. Today, dozens of targeted drugs are available and new treatment options are emerging even for genetic alterations, which until now seemed to be undruggable.

Immunotherapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

Immunotherapy with check-point inhibitors has demonstrated remarkable therapeutic benefits in many oncological diagnoses, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Based on the data from clinical trials, it has become an important part of the NSCLC treatment algorithm. Treatment with programmed cell death protein 1 / programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors can be indicated in various ways: as monotherapy or combination of immunotherapy with cytotox--ic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 inhibitors or in combination with other treatment modalities - chemotherapy, antiangiogenic therapy and radiotherapy. Regarding new spectrum of immune-related side effects, which require quick diagnosis and treatment, there is great urge to identify immunotherapy predictive biomarkers.

[Triple-negative breast cancer: analysis of patients diagnosed and/or treated at the Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute between 2004 and 2009]. / Triple-negativní karcinom prsu: analýza souboru pacientek diagnostikovaných a/nebo lécených v Masarykove onkologickém ústavu v letech 2004 az 2009.

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) represents a heterogeneous group of breast cancers that do not express ER-α, PgR and Her-2 receptors. Generally, these tumors are aggressive and more common in younger women, in which an association of TNBC with mutations in the BRCA1 gene was documented. The aim of our study was to create a representative group of patients with TNBC, which could be analyzed and the data gathered to build basic epidemiological, molecular and clinical characteristics of Czech patients with TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed basic clinical-pathologic correlations in a group of 335 patients diagnosed and/or treated for TNBC at the Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute between 2004 and 2009. We also performed immunohistochemical examination of expression of cytokeratin 5/6, cytokeratin 14 and EGFR to identify the basal-like subset of TNBC. RESULTS: The median age of patients with TNBC was 56 years, range 25-88 years. A total of 9.25% of TNBC cases were diagnosed in patients under the age of 34, and another 15.22% of cases were in the age group of 35 to 44 years. 'Basal-like' carcinomas accounted for 75% of TNBC. We confirmed the aggressive nature of this disease: in the follow-up period we observed a relapse in 25% of patients: 55% of deaths due to disease progression occured within 2 years after diagnosis of the disease. Treatment strategies include chemotherapy, in most cases (88.4%). Chemotherapy was mostly based on regimens with anthracyclines or in combination with taxanes. The most important negative prognostic factors in relation to OS (disease specific OS) were: higher clinical stage (p < 0.0001), pN - positive status (p < 0.0001), high proliferative activity (as measured by Ki-67, cut-off 50%, HR = 0.4740, p = 0.0411) and positive expression of CK5/6 (HR = 0.4274, p = 0.0338). In relation to DFS, the negative prognostic significance was found for these factors: higher clinical stage (p < 0.0001), pN positive status (p < 0.0001), high proliferative activity (Ki-67, cut-off 50%, HR = 0.04993, p = 0.0240). DFS was longer in patients with a higher number of applied cycles of anthracycline-based chemotherapy (> 4 cycles, HR = 1.7273, p = 0.0467). CONCLUSION: TNBC is an aggressive form of breast cancer, which may occur in patients of all ages, but more frequently in younger patients. Only early detection of disease and intensive treatment gives a high chance of cure. Unfortunately, no reliable predictive factors have been identified so far. Better therapeutic results can be expected from targeted therapy.

[Trastuzumab in the breast cancer treatment: efficacy and resistance mechanisms]. / Trastuzumab v liecbe karcinómu prsníka: mechanizmy úcinku a rezistencie.

Trastuzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against the HER-2 receptor, was the first targeted therapy for HER-2 positive breast cancer. The treatment of HER-2 positive breast cancer in monotherapy, but mainly in combination with cytostatics trastuzumab, showed significant efficacy and increased the time to progression/relapse and overall survival. On the other hand, despite it being administered to only a selected patient population, the response rate varies in range and duration due to the primary or acquired tumor resistance to trastuzumab. Several mechanisms contributing to the drug resistance are presumed and overcoming strategies are in development. In connection with the drug resistance there are the mechanisms of trastuzumab's action on tumor cells and the search for feasible biomarkers in order to predict the response of trastuzumab-based targeted therapies. Furthermore, we present here the actual possibilities to overcome primary or acquired trastuzumab resistance.

[Factors predicting failure of adjuvant hormonotherapy of breast carcinoma. A study in tamoxifen treated patients]. / Faktory predikující selhání adjuvantní hormonoterapie u karcinomu prsu, studované na souboru pacientek lécených tamoxifenem.

BACKGROUND: The latest clinical trials indicate better performance of aromatase inhibitors, compared to tamoxifen, in adjuvant hormonotherapy of breast carcinoma. The identification of molecular markers, predicting resistance to tamoxifen, could help to identify patients, which are most likely to benefit from aromatase inhibitors in up-front adjuvant hormonotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Tissue microarrays were constructed from archival paraffin blocks of primary tumors of 179 patients with estrogen receptor positive operable breast carcinoma in stage I-III, subsequently treated with tamoxifen for five years or until relapse, with at least 7 years follow up available. The amplifications of Her-2 and cyclin D1 genes were evaluated by fluorescence in-situ hybridization. The level of progesterone receptor (PR) and Ki67 were estimated by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: 54 of above patients recurred during follow up. In univariate analysis of disease free survival, the presence of more than three nodal metastases (RR=4,5 p<0,001), grade 3 (RR=2,3 p=0,035), cyclin D1 (RR=3,06 p<0,001) and Her-2 (RR=3,06 p<0,001) amplifications were identified as significant risk factors, together with the negativity of PR (RR=2,1 p=0,013). In multivariate analysis, only clinical stage III (RR=2,6 p=0,003), cyclin D1 (RR=2,7 p=0,001) and Her-2 (RR=2,1 p=0,014) amplifications proved significant. In 77 patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy no statistically significant risk factor was identified. In multivariate analysis of 102 patients without adjuvant chemotherapy only stage III (RR=6,9 p=0,001) and Her-2 amplification (RR=4,5 p=0,001) were confirmed. CONCLUSION: The advanced clinical stage, cyclin D1 and Her-2 gene amplifications represent factors, predicting the failure of adjuvant tamoxifen treatment, but their predictive value is much lower in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. This fact indicates, they can reflect the common biological aggressiveness of tumor and need not to be tamoxifen specific.