Search

Background: Based on the mechanism of action, combining somatostatin analogues (SSAs) with mTOR inhibitors or antiangiogenic agents may provide synergistic effects for the treatment of patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). Herein, we investigate the use of these treatment combinations in clinical practice. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients with NETs treated with the SSA lanreotide and targeted therapies at 35 Spanish hospitals evaluated the efficacy and safety of lanreotide treatment combinations in clinical practice. The data of 159 treatment combinations with lanreotide in 133 patients was retrospectively collected. Results: Of the 133 patients, with a median age of 59.4 (16-83) years, 70 (52.6 %) patients were male, 64 (48.1 %) had pancreatic NET, 23 (17.3 %) had ECOG PS >= 2, 41 (30.8 %) had functioning tumours, 63 (47.7 %) underwent surgery of the primary tumour, 45 (33.8 %) had received prior chemotherapy, and 115 (86.5 %) had received prior SSAs. 115 patients received 1 lanreotide treatment combination and 18 patients received between 2 and 5 combinations. Lanreotide was mainly administered in combination with everolimus (73 combinations) or sunitinib (61 combinations). The probability of being progression-free was 78.5 % (6 months), 68.6 % (12 months) and 57.0 % (18 months) for patients who only received everolimus plus lanreotide (n = 57) and 89.3 % (6 months), 73.0 % (12 months), and 67.4 % (18 months) for patients who only received sunitinib and lanreotide (n = 50). In patients who only received everolimus plus lanreotide the median time-to-progression from the initiation of lanreotide combination treatment was 25.8 months (95 % CI, 11.3, 40.3) and it had not yet been reached among the subgroup of patients only receiving sunitinib plus lanreotide. The safety profile of the combination treatment was comparable to that of the targeted agent alone. Conclusions: The combination of lanreotide and targeted therapies, mainly everolimus and sunitinib, is widely used in clinical practice without unexpected toxicities and suggests efficacy that should be explored in randomized prospective clinical trials.

Purpose: To determine efficacy and toxicity of two pemetrexed-based regimens in chemonaive patients with locally advanced or metastatic non–small cell lung cancer. Experimental Design: Patients were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus oxaliplatin 120 mg/m2 (PemOx) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin AUC6 (PemCb). All drugs were given on day 1 of a 21-day cycle for up to six cycles. Folic acid and vitamin B12 were given to all patients to minimize pemetrexed-related toxicities. Results: Forty-one patients received PemOx and 39 received PemCb. Objective tumor response rates were 26.8% for PemOx patients (95% confidence interval, 14.2-42.9) and 31.6% for PemCb patients (95% confidence interval, 17.5-48.7). Median time to progression was 5.5 and 5.7 months, respectively, for PemOx and PemCb. Median overall survival times were 10.5 months for both treatment groups (range, 20 months). The 1-year survival rate was 49.9% for PemOx patients and 43.9% for PemCb patients. Common toxicity criteria grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities among PemOx patients were grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (7.3%), grade 3 thrombocytopenia (2.4%), and grade 3 anemia (2.4%). PemCb patients experienced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (25.6%), grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia (17.9%), and grade 3 anemia (7.7%). Grade 3 vomiting occurred in three PemOx patients and grade 3 fatigue occurred in three PemCb patients. One grade 3 neurosensory toxicity occurred in the PemOx group. Three patients (PemOx 1 and PemCb 2) experienced febrile neutropenia. Conclusions: Efficacy measures for both regimens seem similar to the most effective chemotherapies for advanced non–small cell lung cancer (platinum combinations) with less hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity. Comparing either of these two regimens to platinum-based therapies in a large randomized trial is warranted.

This paper presents a QFD based methodology allowing the assessment of different plant layout proposals. Facilities layout is a key factor affecting a firm’s profitability and productivity. Such a decision is a strategic one. In literature several works deal with this aspect, and in particular concerning the design task. Meanwhile, along the plant layout life cycle, other ac-tivities have to be carried out that are equally important. This makes the evaluation phase necessarily subsequent. With respect to other assessing techniques, that are often too vague, the one here presented attempts to face the problem in a more rigorous fashion. On the basis of the QFD concept, the most important aspects concerning a plant layout evalua-tion are considered. In particular, customer needs are first derived, technical requirements are identified, and finally a comparison method is presented.

Clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common kidney cancer. New treatment options of localized RCC recently incorporated include laparoscopic surgery, nephron-sparing surgery, ablative techniques and active surveillance. But 50 % of patients may develop disease recurrence attributable to subclinical metastases. In these cases, and considering the low benefits of chemotherapy, new targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors have been developed as first- and second-line treatment. Both sunitinib and pazopanib are TKIs that constitute the first-line treatment option in patients with metastatic RCC. As second-line treatment, sequential therapy with a second TKI or a mTOR inhibitor is recommended. This review has collected together a series of recommendations issued by the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group with the aim of facilitating the treatment of these patients. Each recommendation is accompanied by the level of evidence and grade of recommendation on the basis of the available data.

Patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract (TCCU) who fail initial platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced disease represent a challenge in daily clinical practice. Vinflunine is approved by the European Medicine Agency (EMA) but, up to now, limited experience has been reported outside clinical trials.

Background: Based on the TROPIC study results, cabazitaxel was approved for the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing on or after docetaxel. Methods: This multi-centre program provided early access to cabazitaxel to patients with mCRPC before its commercialization. Safety data from 153 Spanish patients receiving cabazitaxel 25 mg/m(2) i.v. Q3W, plus oral prednisone/prednisolone 10 mg daily, are reported. Results: Median age of patients was 70 years (26.8% >= 75 years), 94.1 and 26.8% had bone and visceral metastasis, respectively. Most had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group = 3 AEs were neutropenia (n = 25, 16.3%) and asthenia (n = 17, 11.1%). Febrile neutropenia and grade >= 3 diarrhea occurred in 5.2% of the patients each. There were five (3.3%) possibly treatment-related deaths, mainly infection-related. G-CSFs were used in 114 (74.5%) patients, generally as prophylaxis (n = 107; 69.9%). Grade >= 3 peripheral neuropathy and nail disorders were uncommon. Conclusions: Cabazitaxel administration, in a real-world setting, is tolerated by Spanish patients with mCRPC, and the AEs are manageable.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The RECORD-1 trial established the clinical benefit of everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) after failure of initial vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFr-TKI) therapy. The REACT (RAD001 Expanded Access Clinical Trial in RCC) study was initiated to address an unmet medical need by providing everolimus prior to commercial availability, and also to further assess the safety and efficacy of everolimus in patients with VEGFr-TKI-refractory mRCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: REACT (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00655252) was a global, open-label, expanded-access programme in patients with mRCC who were intolerant of, or who had progressed on or after stopping treatment with, any available VEGFr-TKI therapy. Patients received everolimus 10mg once daily, with dose and schedule modifications allowed for toxicity. Patients were closely monitored for the development of serious and grades 3/4 adverse events (AEs). Response was assessed by RECIST every 3months for the first year and every 6months thereafter. RESULTS: A total of 1367 patients were enroled. Safety findings and tumour responses were consistent with those observed in RECORD-1, with no new safety issues identified. The most commonly reported serious AEs were dyspnoea (5.0%), pneumonia (4.7%) and anaemia (4.1%), and the most commonly reported grades 3/4 AEs were anaemia (13.4%), fatigue (6.7%) and dyspnoea (6.5%). Best overall response was stable disease in 51.6% and partial response in 1.7% of patients. Median everolimus treatment duration was 14weeks. CONCLUSION: Everolimus is well tolerated in patients with mRCC and demonstrates a favourable risk-benefit ratio.

Context: Controversies and uncertainties among integral management of advanced castration resistant prostate cancer continue to exist despite the number of evidence based clinical practice guidelines published with high international consensus. Objective: To develop a document that reviews the management of controversies in advanced castration resistant prostate cancer, with recommendations from the definition, to the management in hormonal maneuvers, first-line treatment and second-line with new treatments as cabazitaxel or abirarerone and the multidisciplinary approach of the pathology with the goal of finding the most efficient, best time to act and safety. Evidence Acquisition: Two meetings of a multidisciplinary group of experts involved in the management of this disease (Oncologist and Urologist) where pooled analysis of original literature and reached consensus document of recommendations on castration resistant prostate cancer, reviewing and attempting to address the current controversies of the disease. Evidence Synthesis: This document is endorsed by the corresponding Scientific Associations and Working Groups involved in the current management of Genitourinary Tumours: the Spanish Association of Urology (AEU) with the Uro-Oncoloy Group (GUO) and the Spanish Oncology of Genitourinary Group (SOGUG). Conclusions: With the adaptation and implementation of this Document of Recommendations for clinical practice are available for the first time, a real road map for quality, efficiency and safety in the management of patients with CRPC. (c) 2012 AEU. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L. All rights reserved.

Elderly or frail patients are often excluded from clinical trials. As a result, clinical outcome of these patients may differ from those obtained in trials. This situation may also hold true for patients who have severe concomitant diseases such as renal, hepatic, or cardiac dysfunction. Being aware of the wide range of clinical situations that a specialist may face is important to ensure that under any circumstances, the patient will receive the best treatment possible. The Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group issued its first public statement on recommendations for the optimal management of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, some issues remained unsolved. In this report, we discuss the current role of Medical Oncology in the treatment of patients with advanced RCC and review the management of special patient populations, such as elderly or patients with concomitant diseases.

For almost the last two decades, interleukin-2 and interferon-alpha have been the only systemic treatment options available for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. However, in recent years, five new targeted therapies namely sunitinib, sorafenib, temsirolimus, everolimus and bevacizumab have demonstrated clinical activity in these patients. With the availability of new targeted agents that are active in this disease, there is a need to continuously update the treatment algorithm of the disease. Due to the important advances obtained, the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) has considered it would be useful to review the current status of the disease, including the genetic and molecular biology factors involved, the current predicting models for development of metastases as well as the role of surgery, radiotherapy and systemic therapies in the early- or late management of the disease. Based on this previous work, a treatment algorithm was developed.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of sunitinib versus interferon-alpha (IFN-alpha) treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 304 mRCC patients (European cohort) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive sunitinib (50 mg/day for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off) or IFN-alpha (9 million units s.c. injection three times/week). The following questionnaires were completed (days 1 and 28 per cycle): Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index and the EuroQol Group's EQ-5D self-report questionnaire (EQ-5D). Results correspond to an ongoing trial with progression-free survival time as primary end point, and patients were still being followed up. Data were analyzed using repeated measures mixed effects models (MEMs) that allow the inclusion of initial differences and uncompleted repeated measures, with the assumption of data missing at random. Six-cycle results were included. RESULTS: Results consistently showed that patients in sunitinib group experienced statistically significantly milder kidney-related symptoms, better cancer-specific HRQoL and general health status (in social utility scores) during the study period as measured by these patient-reported outcome end points. No statistical differences between groups were found on the FACT-G physical well-being subscale or the EQ-5D VAS values. CONCLUSIONS: Results from MEM showed the sunitinib's benefit on HRQoL compared with IFN-alpha.