Carlo Buonerba

Toxicities of Targeted Therapy and Their Management in Kidney Cancer

CONTEXT The therapeutic scenario for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been evolving rapidly, with sunitinib, sorafenib, bevacizumab, everolimus, pazopanib, and temsirolimus being successfully tested and approved in a short period of time. Oncologists must be familiar with the management of toxicity that these biologic agents cause, as such toxicity is different from that of conventional chemotherapeutic agents. OBJECTIVE To describe toxic effects associated with targeted therapy of mRCC and their proper management on the basis of currently available evidence. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We conducted a systematic analysis of the literature on 15th October 2010 by performing a search of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) on PubMed using the words sorafenib, sunitinib, bevacizumab, everolimus, pazopanib, or temsirolimus combined with the MeSH term kidney neoplasms. Consideration for inclusion was given to articles providing data concerning (1) incidence and grading and (2) management of targeted therapy-related toxic effects. A separate search was conducted on PubMed to retrieve meta-analyses using each drug name and the word meta-analysis. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Hypertension, fatigue, bone marrow toxicity, skin toxicity, and gastrointestinal side-effects are common with the six targeted agents. Everolimus and temsirolimus are associated with immunosuppression, metabolic alterations, and interstitial pneumonitis, while sunitinib is associated with hypothyroidism. Recommendations for treating these conditions usually follow those for the general population because of the lack of experimental data in this setting (eg, for management of sunitinib-induced hypertension). CONCLUSIONS The treating oncologist should try to manage side-effects associated with targeted therapy using supportive and pharmacologic interventions. Severe toxicity requires external specialist consultation and treatment suspension and/or dose reduction. Experimental data about the management of targeted therapy-related toxicity in mRCC is lacking and required in this setting.

Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Current and Emerging Treatment Strategies

Until very recently, docetaxel was the only approved agent in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and other effective therapeutic options are urgently needed. In recent years, several new agents with promising activity and a favourable toxicity profile have been developed and clinically investigated in the fields of hormonal, cytotoxic, targeted and immune therapy. In particular, recent results from two large phase III trials of sipuleucel-T and cabazitaxel show that these two agents significantly prolong overall survival in CRPC. Indeed, sipuleucel-T has recently been approved by the US FDA for the treatment of CRPC. Many other pharmaceuticals, which are presented in this review, have been investigated recently or are being investigated in phase III trials and might prove to be effective in the future. Reviewed articles are discussed in light of the innovations in study design brought by the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2), which updated the Prostate-Specific Antigen Working Group (PCWG1) guidelines, in order to allow better identification of potentially active drugs in clinical trials.

Phase II study of docetaxel re-treatment in docetaxel-pretreated castration-resistant prostate cancer

Study Type – Therapy (cohort)
Level of Evidence 2b

Immunotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer

Failure of immune surveillance has a prominent role in tumorigenesis. Cancerous cells can evade T-cell responses to tumor-associated antigens by multiple mechanisms. Active immunotherapy aims to stimulate the immune response against cancer cells. Unlike normal prostate tissue, prostate cancer is not ignored by the immune system, as shown by the presence of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. This characteristic renders prostate cancer particularly suitable for immunotherapy. The existence of well-defined antigens, largely limited to prostate tissue, allows prostate cancer cells to be targeted without the risk of systemic autoimmune reactions, as autoimmunity specifically directed at the prostate is the goal of prostate cancer immunotherapy. Active immunotherapy directed towards prostate cancer can be conducted using multiple strategies, involving dendritic cells, whole-cell vaccines, viral vectors, DNA-based and peptide-based agents, as well as immunostimulatory agents. The only FDA-approved immunotherapy for prostate cancer is the dendritic-cell-based agent Sipuleucel-T, which yielded an advantage in overall survival, but not in progression-free survival in a phase III trial. We present the clinical developments in the field of immunotherapy and critically analyze methodological issues related to the evaluation of tumor responses to immunotherapy, trial design, and surrogate end points.

A comprehensive outlook on intracerebral therapy of malignant gliomas.

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most frequent and aggressive malignant glioma (MG), with a median survival time of 12-15 months, despite current best treatment based on surgery, radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy. Many potentially active therapeutic agents are not effective by systemic administration, because they are unable to cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). As intracerebral administration bypasses the BBB, it increases the number of drugs that can be successfully delivered to the brain, with the possibility of minor systemic toxicity and better effectiveness. This review summarizes the results of the extensive clinical research conducted on intracerebral therapy. Biodegradable drug carriers, implantable subcutaneous reservoirs and convection-enhanced delivery (CED) represent the main techniques for intracerebral delivery, while conventional chemotherapy agents, radiolabeled antibodies and receptor-targeted toxins are the main classes of drugs for intracerebral therapy. At the present time, biodegradable carmustine wafers, commercialized as Gliadel(®), are the only FDA-approved treatment for intracerebral chemotherapy of MG, but intracavitary delivery of mitoxantrone and radiolabeled antitenascin antibodies via implantable reservoirs has yielded promising results in uncontrolled trials. The pressure-driven flow generated by CED can potentially distribute convected drugs over large volumes of the brain, independently on their intrinsic diffusivity. Nevertheless, prominent technical problems, like backflow, are yet to be properly addressed and contributed to the disappointing results of two phase III trials that investigated CED of cintredekin besudotox and TransMid™ in patients with recurrent GBM.

Penile cancer: current therapy and future directions

Background Penile cancer (PC) is a rare cancer in western countries, but is more common in parts of the developing world. Due to its rarity and the consequent lack of randomized trials, current therapy is based on retrospective studies and small prospective trials. Design Studies of PC therapy were searched in PubMed and abstracts at major conferences. Results PC is generally an aggressive malignancy characterized by early locoregional lymph node (LN) spread and later metastases in distant sites. Given the strong predictive value of LN involvement for overall survival, evaluating regional LNs is critical. Advanced LN involvement is increasingly being treated with multimodality therapy incorporating chemotherapy and/or radiation. A single superior cisplatin-based regimen has not been defined. Further advances may occur with a better collaboration on an international scale and comprehensive understanding of tumor biology. To this end, the preventive role of circumcision and understanding of the oncogenic roles of Human Papilloma Virus-16, and smoking may yield advances. Preliminary data suggest a role for agents targeting epidermal growth factor receptor and angiogenesis. Conclusion Advances in therapy for PC will require efficient trial designs, synergistic collaboration, incentives to industry and the efforts of patient advocacy groups and venture philanthropists.

Anaplastic thyroid carcinoma: A comprehensive review of current and future therapeutic options.

Anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (ATC) is the rarest, but deadliest histologic type among thyroid malignancies, with a dismal median survival of 3-9 mo. Even though ATC accounts for less than 2% of all thyroid tumors, it is responsible for 14%-39% of thyroid carcinoma-related deaths. ATC clinically presents as a rapidly growing mass in the neck, associated with dyspnoea, dysphagia and vocal cord paralysis. It is usually locally advanced and often metastatic at initial presentation. For operable diseases, the combination of radical surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy, using agents such as doxorubicin and cisplatin, is the best treatment strategy. Cytotoxic drugs for advanced/metastatic ATC are poorly effective. On the other hand, targeted agents might represent a viable therapeutic option. Axitinib, combretastatin A4, sorafenib and imatinib have been tested in small clinical trials of ATC, with a promising disease control rate ranging from 33% to 75%. Other clinical trials of targeted therapy for thyroid carcinoma are currently ongoing. Biological agents that are under investigation include pazopanib, gefitinib and everolimus. With the very limited therapeutic armamentarium available at the present time, targeted therapy constitutes an exciting new horizon for ATC. In future, biological agents will probably represent the standard of care for this aggressive malignancy, in the same fashion as it has recently occurred for other chemo-refractory tumors, such as kidney and hepatic cancer.

Third-Line Sorafenib After Sequential Therapy With Sunitinib and mTOR Inhibitors in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND Sunitinib and everolimus have been approved for first- and second-line treatment, respectively, in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The role of sorafenib, which is approved for second-line treatment after cytokines failure, is presently to be defined. OBJECTIVE To determine whether third-line sorafenib after sequential use of sunitinib and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (everolimus or temsirolimus) is feasible and effective. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS One hundred fifty medical records of patients with mRCC treated with first-line sunitinib between January 2006 and January 2010 were reviewed at four participating centers. Data regarding patients treated with the sequence sunitinib-everolimus or temsirolimus-sorafenib were extracted. Central analysis of radiographic images was performed using RECIST criteria to determine progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (oRR) to sorafenib treatment. MEASUREMENTS PFS and oRR to sorafenib were the primary end points. Secondary outcomes were safety and overall survival (OS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Thirty-four patients were eligible for the study. A median PFS of 4 mo (range: 3-6 mo) and a median OS of 7 mo since sorafenib treatment (range: 6-10 mo) were reported. Of the patients, 23.5% showed response to sorafenib, with an overall disease control rate (complete responses plus partial responses plus stable disease) of 44%. Selection bias, data incompleteness, and absence of study design are inevitable limitations of the study, although central review can strengthen the quality of presented data. CONCLUSIONS Third-line sorafenib appears to be active and well tolerated in mRCC after first-line sunitinib and second-line everolimus or temsirolimus, with no patients interrupting sorafenib because of toxicity or lack of compliance. Prospective, placebo-controlled trials are completely lacking and are required in this setting.

Prostate Health Index (Phi) and Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 (PCA3) Significantly Improve Prostate Cancer Detection at Initial Biopsy in a Total PSA Range of 2–10 ng/ml

Many efforts to reduce prostate specific antigen (PSA) overdiagnosis and overtreatment have been made. To this aim, Prostate Health Index (Phi) and Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 (PCA3) have been proposed as new more specific biomarkers. We evaluated the ability of phi and PCA3 to identify prostate cancer (PCa) at initial prostate biopsy in men with total PSA range of 2–10 ng/ml. The performance of phi and PCA3 were evaluated in 300 patients undergoing first prostate biopsy. ROC curve analyses tested the accuracy (AUC) of phi and PCA3 in predicting PCa. Decision curve analyses (DCA) were used to compare the clinical benefit of the two biomarkers. We found that the AUC value of phi (0.77) was comparable to those of %p2PSA (0.76) and PCA3 (0.73) with no significant differences in pairwise comparison (%p2PSA vs phi p = 0.673, %p2PSA vs. PCA3 p = 0.417 and phi vs. PCA3 p = 0.247). These three biomarkers significantly outperformed fPSA (AUC = 0.60), % fPSA (AUC = 0.62) and p2PSA (AUC = 0.63). At DCA, phi and PCA3 exhibited a very close net benefit profile until the threshold probability of 25%, then phi index showed higher net benefit than PCA3. Multivariable analysis showed that the addition of phi and PCA3 to the base multivariable model (age, PSA, %fPSA, DRE, prostate volume) increased predictive accuracy, whereas no model improved single biomarker performance. Finally we showed that subjects with active surveillance (AS) compatible cancer had significantly lower phi and PCA3 values (p<0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively). In conclusion, both phi and PCA3 comparably increase the accuracy in predicting the presence of PCa in total PSA range 2–10 ng/ml at initial biopsy, outperforming currently used %fPSA.

Cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in inoperable, stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the penis

Study Type – Therapy (case series)