Search

Purpose Lymphadenectomy is a well established practice for many urological malignancies but its role in renal cell carcinoma is less clear. Our primary objective was to determine whether lymphadenectomy impacted survival in patients with fully resected, high risk renal cell carcinoma. Materials and Methods Patients with fully resected, high risk, nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma were randomized to adjuvant sorafenib, sunitinib or placebo in the ASSURE (Adjuvant Sorafenib and Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Carcinoma) trial. Lymphadenectomy was performed for cN+ disease or at surgeon discretion. Patients treated with lymphadenectomy were compared to patients in the trial who did not undergo lymphadenectomy. The primary outcome was overall survival associated with lymphadenectomy. Secondary outcomes were disease free survival, factors associated with performing lymphadenectomy and surgical complications. Results Of the 1,943 patients in ASSURE 701 (36.1%) underwent lymphadenectomy, including all resectable patients with cN+ and 30.1% of those with cN0 disease. A median of 3 lymph nodes (IQR 1–8) were removed and the rate of pN+ disease in the lymphadenectomy group was 23.4%. There was no overall survival benefit for lymphadenectomy relative to no lymphadenectomy (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.93–1.39, p = 0.20). In patients with pN+ disease who underwent lymphadenectomy no improvement in overall or disease-free survival was observed for adjuvant therapy relative to placebo. Lymphadenectomy did not confer an increased risk of surgical complications (14.2% vs 13.4%, p = 0.63). Conclusions The benefit of lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing surgery for high risk renal cell carcinoma remains uncertain. Future strategies to answer this question should include a prospective trial in which patients with high risk renal cell carcinoma are randomized to specific lymphadenectomy templates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At the present time, the standard of care for patients who have received nephrectomy for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is radiographic surveillance. With a number of novel targeted agents showing activity in the setting of metastatic RCC, there has been great interest in exploring the potential of the same agents in the adjuvant setting. Herein,we discuss the evolution of adjuvant trials in RCC, spanning from the immunotherapy era to the targeted therapy era. Pitfalls of current studies are addressed to provide a context for interpreting forthcoming results. Finally, we outline avenues to incorporate promising investigational agents, such as PD-1 (programmed death-1) inhibitors and MNNG transforming gene inhibitors, in future adjuvant trials. The Oncologist 2014;19:851-859 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study on the mechanisms of apoptosis resistance and treatment strategies to overcome them in hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Researchers focused on the aberrations of apoptsis in hormone-refractory prostate cancer, and have recommended treatment strategies to overcome apoptosis resistance. A chart is presented that shows possible therapeutic agents targeting different components of apoptic signaling pathways in hormone-refractory prostate cancer cells.

Abstract: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most lethal of all genitourinary malignancies with nearly half of all patients presenting with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Systemic treatments such as chemo- or immunotherapy have historically been associated with overall response rates of 5–15% with very few durable responses. The basis of newly approved, more effective targeted therapies for metastatic RCC are based on a fundamental knowledge of the molecular mechanisms that give rise to RCC. We review the clinical data for targeted therapies in RCC and discuss the pertinent biology, side effects, and targets important to the practicing clinician. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background. Temsirolimus, an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) complex 1, is approved for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Bryostatin-1 inhibits protein kinase C, a downstream effector of mTOR complex 2. We observed antitumor effects with the combination of temsirolimus and bryostatin-1 in RCC cell lines. Methods. Four cohorts of patients received weekly bryostatin-1 (20 μg/m2) with temsirolimus (10, 15, 25, or 37.5 mg) in 28-day cycles. Results. Thirty patients received a total of 138 cycles across four dose levels. Twenty-five patients had RCC (17 clear cell, 7 papillary, and 1 unclassified). Two sarcoma patients with prior cytotoxic therapy experienced dose-limiting toxicity at 15 mg of temsirolimus (grade 3 neutropenia and grade 3 hypophosphatemia). Subsequently, patients with prior cytotoxic therapy were excluded. Two additional dose-limiting toxicities were noted with 37.5 mg of temsirolimus (grade 3 neutropenia and grade 3 creatinine elevation). Consequently, the maximum tolerated dose was defined as temsirolimus at 25 mg and bryostatin-1 at 20 μg/m2 every 28 days. Of the 25 RCC patients, 3 patients had partial responses that lasted for 14 months, 28 months, and ≥80 months, respectively. Partial responses were seen in both clear cell and papillary histology. Conclusion. This combination of 37.5 mg of temsirolimus with 20 μg/m2 of bryostatin-1 was reasonably safe and well tolerated. Durable responses were observed in 3 of 25 patients with RCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Context Contradictory data exist with regard to adjuvant vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy in surgically managed patients for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Objective To systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding the therapeutic benefit (disease-free survival [DFS] and overall survival [OS]) and grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) for adjuvant VEGFR-targeted therapy for resected localized RCC. Evidence acquisition A critical review of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library in January 2018 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was performed. We identified reports and reviewed them according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria. Of eight full-text articles that were eligible for inclusion, five studies (two of five were updated analyses) were retained in the final synthesis. Study characteristics were abstracted and the number needed to treat (NNT) per trial was estimated. Evidence synthesis The three randomized controlled phase III trials included the following comparisons: sunitinib versus placebo or sorafenib versus placebo (Adjuvant Sorafenib or Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Carcinoma [ASSURE] study, n = 1943), sunitinib versus placebo (S-TRAC, n = 615), and pazopanib versus placebo (Pazopanib As Adjuvant Therapy in Localized/Locally Advanced RCC After Nephrectomy study, n = 1135). The NNT ranged from 10 (S-TRAC) to 137 (ASSURE study). The pooled analysis showed that VEGFR-targeted therapy was not statistically significantly associated with improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR random ]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82–1.03, p = 0.16) or OS (HR random : 0.98, 95% CI: 0.84–1.15, p = 0.84) compared with the control group. The adjuvant therapy group experienced significantly higher odds of grade 3–4 AEs (OR random : 5.89, 95% CI: 4.85–7.15, p < 0.001). In exploratory analyses focusing on patients who started on the full-dose regimen, DFS was improved in patients who received adjuvant therapy (HR random : 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73–0.95, p = 0.005). Conclusions This pooled analysis of reported randomized trials did not reveal a statistically significant effect between adjuvant VEGFR-targeted therapy and improved DFS or OS in patients with intermediate/high-risk local or regional fully resected RCC. Improvement in DFS may be more likely with the use of full-dose regimens, pending further results. However, adjuvant treatment was associated with high-grade AEs. Patient summary Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor–targeted therapy after nephrectomy for localized kidney cancer is not associated with consistent improvements in delaying cancer recurrence or prolonging life and comes at the expense of potentially significant side effects. Take Home Message Adjuvant targeted therapy following complete resection of localized renal cell carcinoma have not consistently demonstrated clinical benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In up to half of patients treated with salvage radiation therapy (SRT) for rising prostate-specific antigen levels, a second biochemical recurrence ultimately develops. Phosphatase and tensin homolog inactivation is implicated in prostate cancer progression, and upregulation of the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway can lead to tumor hypoxia and radioresistance. Everolimus is a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor with both antitumor and radiosensitizing effects.Methods and Materials: We performed a phase 1 study using a modified 3 + 3 dose-escalation design to evaluate the safety and tolerability of everolimus in combination with standard SRT for the treatment of biochemical recurrence following prostatectomy. After a 2-week run-in period of everolimus daily therapy, patients received prostate bed irradiation with daily cone beam computed tomography localization in 37 fractions of 1.8 Gy each (total dose, 66.6 Gy). Patients were monitored for both acute (≤90 days) and chronic (>90 days) treatment-related toxicities.Results: Eighteen patients received everolimus at dose levels of 5 mg (n=6), 7.5 mg (n=6), or 10 mg (n=6) daily in conjunction with SRT. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Common acute treatment-related toxicities included grade 1 or 2 mucositis (55.6%), grade 1 or 2 fatigue (38.9%), grade 1 or 2 rash (61.1%), and grade 1 urinary symptoms (61.1%). A grade 3 acute toxicity occurred in 4 patients (22.2%) (n=1 for rash, anemia, lymphopenia, and neutropenia), and no patients had a chronic toxicity of grade 3 or greater. After a median follow-up time of 17.8 months (range, 1.2-46.0 months), an undetectable prostate-specific antigen nadir was achieved in 9 patients (56.3%) and a second biochemical recurrence developed in 5 patients (31.3%).Conclusions: Everolimus at a dose of ≤10 mg daily appears to be safe and tolerable in combination with fractionated post-prostatectomy radiation therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Pain negatively affects quality of life for cancer patients. Preliminary data in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) suggested a benefit of the oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib to pain palliation. Objective Prospective evaluation of cabozantinib's benefits on pain and narcotic use in mCRPC. Design, setting, and participants This was a nonrandomized expansion (NRE) cohort ( n = 144) of a phase 2 randomized discontinuation trial in docetaxel-refractory mCRPC patients. Pain and interference of symptoms with sleep and general activity were electronically self-reported daily for 7-d intervals at baseline and regularly scheduled throughout the study. Mean per-patient scores were calculated for each interval. Narcotic use was recorded daily during the same intervals. Intervention Open-label cabozantinib (100 mg or 40 mg). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The following stringent response definition was used: clinically meaningful pain reduction (≥30% improvement in mean scores from baseline) confirmed at a later interval without concomitant increases in narcotics. Only patients with moderate or severe baseline pain were analyzed. Results and limitations Sixty-five patients with moderate or severe baseline pain were evaluable. Of these, 27 (42%) experienced pain palliation according to the stringent response definition. Thirty-seven patients (57%) had clinically meaningful pain relief at two consecutive intervals, reported ≥6 wk apart in the majority. Forty-four patients (68%) had palliation at one or more intervals; 36 (55%) decreased narcotics use during one or more intervals. Clinically meaningful pain reduction was associated with significant ( p ≤ 0.001) improvements in sleep quality and general activity. A limitation of this study was its open-label design. Conclusions Cabozantinib demonstrated clinically meaningful pain palliation, reduced or eliminated patients’ narcotic use, and improved patient functioning, thus meriting prospective validation in phase 3 studies. Patient summary We evaluated the potential of cabozantinib to improve symptoms in patients with metastatic prostate cancer that no longer responds to standard therapies. We saw a promising reduction in pain and reduced need for narcotic painkillers. Larger, well-controlled trials are necessary to confirm these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]