The effect of concomitant beta-blocker use on survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors in the first line.

PURPOSE: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibition is one of the cornerstones of treatment in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Since RCC is a disease of advanced age and hypertension as a side effect of VEGF receptor inhibitors, beta-blocker use is common in these patients. We aimed to compare the treatment efficacy and survival results in case of concomitant use of these two drugs due to the inhibition of VEGF in beta-blockers. METHODS: A total of 121 patients with a diagnosis of mRCC who used sunitinib or pazopanib in first-line therapy were included in the study. These patients were divided into two groups as those using concomitant beta-blockers and those not using them. RESULT: The median overall survival (mOS) of the patient using sunitinib or pazopanib and concomitant beta-blocker was 47 (95% CI 29.0-65.0) months, and the mOS of those not using concomitant beta-blocker was 18 (95% CI 8.9-27.1) months (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (mPFS) of the patients using sunitinib or pazopanib and concomitant beta-blocker was 20.4 (95% CI 4.5-40.1) months, and the mPFS of those not using it was 11.4 (95% CI 5.9-16.9) months (p = 0.042). Concomitant beta-blocker use was found to be a good prognostic factor for OS in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.029). In the multivariate analysis, concomitant beta-blocker use had a trend towards statistical significance for PFS (p = 0.062). CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of betablockers with sunitinib or pazopanib is associated with longer overall survial and progression free survival.

Ribociclib-induced hepatotoxicity.

INTRODUCTION: Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors have shown a different adverse effect. In this case, persistent grade 3 hepatoxicity was observed after ribociclib. Therefore, ribociclib therapy was stopped, and then palbociclib was introduced. Transaminase levels returned to normal by switching to palbociclib therapy. CASE REPORT: 71-year-old postmenopausal female patient with luminal subtypes of metastatic breast cancer treated with ribociclib. MANAGEMENT & OUTCOME: Grade 3 hepatotoxicity secondary to ribociclib developed. She was successfully treated with palbociclib 125 mg. DISCUSSION: In our case, palbociclib was started with a full dose, to increase treatment success. Starting with a 125 mg dose was not cause any toxicity. Nevertheless, laboratory follow-up is required in terms of neutropenia and increased transaminases.

Pazopanib-associated secondary adrenal insufficiency in a patient with malignant solitary fibrous tumor.

INTRODUCTION: Pazopanib is an agent that is being successfully used in soft tissue sarcomas. Some endocrine side effects may develop during pazopanib treatment. Here, we presented a case diagnosed with secondary adrenal insufficiency while being investigated for etiology of hypoglycemia which developed after pazopanib. CASE REPORT: A 69-year-old male patient was operated in June 2019 due to a lung mass 26 × 18 × 10 cm in size. Pathological diagnosis revealed a solitary fibrous tumor with malignant behavior. The patient received three lines of chemotherapy. After pazopanib treatment, a hypoglycemic attack was reported.Management and outcome: Blood cortisol and ACTH (Adrenocorticotropic hormone) levels were not increased at the time of the hypoglycemic attack, and levels of other pituitary hormones were found to be normal. Electrolyte levels were in normal range. Since the counteracting hormone did not reach a sufficient level, it was considered secondary adrenal insufficiency. Hypoglycemic attacks did not occur during follow-up while taking steroid therapy and pazopanib. DISCUSSION: A single case of primary adrenal insufficiency has been reported in the literature. We here present a case who developed hypoglycemia after pazopanib and was diagnosed with drug-associated secondary adrenal insufficiency. When hypoglycemia develops during pazopanib treatment, we must be aware of adrenal insufficiency.

Treatment outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with driver mutant non-small cell lung cancer and de novo brain metastases.

Central nervous system (CNS) metastases can be seen at a rate of 30% in advanced stages for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Growing evidence indicates the predictive roles of driver gene mutations in the development of brain metastases (BM) in recent years, meaning that oncogene-driven NSCLC have a high incidence of BM at diagnosis. Today, 3rd generation targeted drugs with high intracranial efficacy, which can cross the blood-brain barrier, have made a positive contribution to survival for these patients with an increased propensity to BM. It is important to update the clinical and pathological factors reflected in the survival with real-life data. A multi-center, retrospective database of 306 patients diagnosed with driver mutant NSCLC and initially presented with BM between between November 2008 and September 2022 were analyzed. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 12.25 months (95% CI, 10-14.5). While 254 of the patients received tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), 51 patients received chemotherapy as first line treatment. The median intracranial PFS (iPFS) was 18.5 months (95% CI, 14.8-22.2). The median overall survival (OS) was 29 months (95% CI, 25.2-33.0). It was found that having 3 or less BM and absence of extracranial metastases were significantly associated with better mOS and iPFS. The relationship between the size of BM and survival was found to be non-significant. Among patients with advanced NSCLC with de novo BM carrying a driver mutation, long-term progression-free and overall survival can be achieved with the advent of targeted agents with high CNS efficacy with more conservative and localized radiotherapy modalities.

Is the Prognostic Nutritional Index a Prognostic Marker for the Survival of Patients with Lymph-Node Positive Stage II-III Gastric Cancer Who Receive Adjuvant Chemotherapy?

PURPOSE: The prognostic nutritional index (PNI), like other systemic inflammatory markers, has been shown to be a prognostic factor in various cancer patients. In this study, we aimed to show whether PNI calculated before adjuvant chemotherapy is a prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with lymph node-positive stage II-III gastric cancer. METHODS: The PNI was calculated using the albumin and lymphocyte count. The PNI cut-off value was found to be 39.5. They were divided into two groups as being ≤ 39.5 (PNI low group) and > 39.5 (PNI high group). RESULTS: Our study included 168 patients with lymph node-positive stage II-III gastric cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy. Of the patients, 116 (69.0%) were 65 years or younger, and 52 (31.0%) were over 65 years old. Of the patients, 117 (69.6%) were pT3, 51 (30.4%) were pT4. Seventy-three (43.4%) patients had pN1-2 disease and 95 (56.6%) patients had pN3 disease. The number of stage II patients was 73 (43.5%) and the number of stage III patients was 95 (56.5%). There were 73 patients with PNI ≤ 39.5 and 95 patients with PNI > 39.5. The mOS of the patients with low PNI group was 39.5 months, while the OS of the patients with high PNI group was 96.8 months (p = 0.002). In the group of patients with PNI low group, mDFS 24.4 months was significantly higher than those with PNI high group was 50.7 months (p = 0.021). The PNI score was statistically significant in univariate and multivariate analyzes for both DFS and OS. CONCLUSION: PNI can be used as an independent prognostic factor for both OS and DFS in patients lymph node-positive, stage II-III gastric cancer who will receive adjuvant chemotherapy.

The effect of concomitant proton pump inhibitor use on survival outcomes of Nivolumab-treated renal cell carcinoma patients: a multicenter study.

AIM: We aimed to evaluate the effect of concomitant proton pump inhibitors (PPI) use with nivolumab on survival outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in second-line setting. METHODS: The study was designed as a multicenter and retrospective involving patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving second-line nivolumab therapy. One hundred and nine patients with mRCC were divided into two groups based on whether they use PPI concomitantly with nivolumab: concomitant PPI users and non-users. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between the groups with and without concurrent PPIs. RESULTS: Of 109 patients in our study, 59 were not using PPI concomitantly with nivolumab and 50 were using PPI concomitantly. The median PFS was 6.37 (5.2-7.5) months in the concomitant PPI group and 9.7 (4.5-15) months in the non-users (p = 0.03). The median OS was 14.6 (7.1-22.1) months in patients on PPI concurrently with nivolumab and 29.9 (17.1-42.7) months in the non-users (p = 0.01). Accordingly, PPI use for PFS (Non-use vs. Use = HR: 0.44, 95%Cl 0.28-0.96, p = 0.014) and PPI use for OS (Non-use vs. Use = HR: 0.68, 95%Cl 0.22-0.88, p = 0.01) were found to be as independent risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of PPIs is associated with worse survival outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab. Clinicians should carefully consider the concomitant use of PPIs in such patients.

First-line treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer.

Fluoropyrimidine+cisplatin/oxaliplatin+trastuzumab therapy is recommended for the first-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma. However, there is no comprehensive study on which platinum-based treatment should be preferred. This study aimed to compare the treatment response and survival characteristics of patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer who received fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and leucovorin (mFOLFOX)+trastuzumab or cisplatin and fluorouracil (CF)+trastuzumab as first-line therapy. It was a multicenter, retrospective study of the Turkish Oncology Group, which included 243 patients from 21 oncology centers. There were 113 patients in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm and 130 patients in the CF+trastuzumab arm. The median age was 62 years in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm and 61 years in the CF+trastuzumab arm (P = 0.495). 81.4% of patients in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm and 83.1% in the CF+trastuzumab arm had gastric tumor localization (P = 0.735). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly higher in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm (9.4 months vs. 7.3 months, P = 0.024). The median overall survival (OS) was similar in both groups (18.4 months vs. 15.1 months, P = 0.640). Maintenance trastuzumab was continued after chemotherapy in 101 patients. In this subgroup, the median OS was 23.3 months and the median PFS was 13.3 months. In conclusion, mFOLFOX+trastuzumab is similar to CF+trastuzumab in terms of the median OS, but it is more effective in terms of the median PFS in the first-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic gastric and GEJ cancer. The choice of treatment should be made by considering the prominent toxicity findings of the chemotherapy regimens.