Current Treatment Options in Oncology最新文献

Opinion statement: Despite targeted therapy and immunotherapy being recognized as established frontline treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the unavoidable development of resistance and disease progression poses ongoing challenges. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) offer a potent treatment option for NSCLC through the specific delivery of cytotoxic agents to tumor cells that display distinct antigens. This review delves into the latest evidence regarding promising ADC agents for NSCLC, focusing on their targets, effectiveness, and safety assessments. Additionally, our study provides insights into managing toxicities, identifying biomarkers, devising methods to counter resistance mechanisms, tackling prevailing challenges, and outlining prospects for the clinical implementation of these innovative ADCs and combination regimens in NSCLC.

Opinion statement: Cardiotoxicity has emerged as a serious outcome catalyzed by various therapeutic targets in the field of cancer treatment, which includes chemotherapy, radiation, and targeted therapies. The growing significance of cancer drug-induced cardiotoxicity (CDIC) and radiation-induced cardiotoxicity (CRIC) necessitates immediate attention. This article intricately unveils how cancer treatments cause cardiotoxicity, which is exacerbated by patient-specific risks. In particular, drugs like anthracyclines, alkylating agents, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors pose a risk, along with factors such as hypertension and diabetes. Mechanistic insights into oxidative stress and topoisomerase-II-B inhibition are crucial, while cardiac biomarkers show early damage. Timely intervention and prompt treatment, especially with specific agents like dexrazoxane and beta-blockers, are pivotal in the proactive management of CDIC.

Opinion statement: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) refers to small fragments of DNA released into the bloodstream by cancer cells. It is obtained through "liquid biopsy;" which most commonly refers to plasma or blood samples, but can be obtained from a number of bodily fluids including ascitic fluid, saliva, and even urine and stool. ctDNA is detected via polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or next-generation sequencing (NGS). The DNA from these samples is analyzed for the detection of point mutations, copy-number alterations, gene fusion, and DNA methylation. These results have the potential for use in cancer diagnosis, determining prognosis, targeting gene-specific therapies, and monitoring for/predicting disease recurrence and response to treatment. ctDNA offers an alternative to tissue biopsy; it is less invasive and can be monitored serially over time without multiple procedures. Moreover it may have the ability to detect disease recurrence or predict behavior in a way that solid tissue biopsies, tumor marker surveillance, and imaging cannot. Recent explosion in interest in ctDNA shows promising developments for widespread adoption of these techniques in cancer care. However, the use of ctDNA in diagnosis and treatment of gynecologic malignancies is currently limited, compared to adoption in other solid-organ tumors such as breast and colorectal cancers. Compared to other cancer types, there appear to be fewer comprehensive studies and clinical validations specifically focusing on the use of ctDNA in gynecologic cancers. More research is needed in this area to advance the potential for use of ctDNA in ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancers before this can be routinely adopted to improve care for patients with gynecologic malignancies.

Opinion statement: Over the past decades, the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer has evolved dramatically due to improvements in diagnostic imaging, surgical technique, and the addition of radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Fractionation of neoadjuvant radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy remains the subject of discussion and the question multiple recent trials have aimed to answer. In light of recent data and concern for locoregional recurrence, our institution favors long-course chemoradiation in most cases, especially in low-lying primaries, threatened circumferential resection margin, consideration of non-operative management, or if the surgeon has concerns for resectability. Exceptions would include cases of oligometastatic disease planned for metastasectomy in which curative-intent treatment was pursued or if additional factors required a reduction in treatment time.

Opinion statement: The introduction of total mesorectal excision into the radical surgery of rectal cancer has significantly improved the oncological outcome with longer survival and lower local recurrence. Traditional treatment modalities of distal rectal cancer, relying on radical surgery, while effective, take their own set of risks, including surgical complications, potential damage to the anus, and surrounding structure owing to the pursuit of thorough resection. The progress of operating methods as well as the integration of systemic therapies and radiotherapy into the peri-operative period, particularly the exciting clinical complete response of patients after neoadjuvant treatment, have paved the way for organ preservation strategy. The non-inferiority oncological outcome of "watch and wait" compared with radical surgery underscores the potential of organ preservation not only to control local recurrence but also to reduce the need for treatments followed by structure destruction, hopefully improving the long-term quality of life. Radical radiotherapy provides another treatment option for patients unwilling or unable to undergo surgery. Organ preservation points out the direction of treatment for distal rectal cancer, while additional researches are needed to answer remaining questions about its optimal use.

Opinion statement: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) over 5-6 weeks with daily doses of 1.8-2.0 Gy to a total dose of 50-50.4 Gy is standard of care for localized high-grade soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the extremities and trunk wall. One exception is myxoid liposarcomas where the phase II DOREMY trial applying a preoperative dose of 36 Gy in 2 Gy fractions (3-4 weeks treatment) has achieved excellent local control rates of 100% after a median follow-up of 25 months.Hypofractionated preoperative RT has been investigated in a number of phase II single-arm studies suggesting that daily doses of 2.75-8 Gy over 1-3 weeks can achieve similar oncological outcomes to conventional neoadjuvant RT. Prospective data with direct head-to-head comparison to conventional neoadjuvant RT investigating oncological outcomes and toxicity profiles is eagerly awaited.For the entire group of retroperitoneal sarcomas, RT is not the standard of care. The randomized multi-center STRASS trial did not find a benefit in abdominal recurrence-free survival by the addition of preoperative RT. However, for the largest histological subgroup of well-differentiated and grades I and II dedifferentiated liposarcomas, the STRASS trial and the post-hoc propensity-matched STREXIT analysis have identified a possible benefit in survival by preoperative RT. These patients deserve to be informed about the pros and cons of preoperative RT while the longer follow-up data from the STRASS trial is awaited.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains the second most deadly cancer in the United States, behind only lung cancer. Despite improvements in incidence due to screening and mortality in part due to better treatments, there are some groups that have not seen these promising changes. American Indian/Alaska Native and non-Hispanic Black individuals, certain geographic regions, and lower socioeconomic groups have all been shown to have worse CRC outcomes. A significant body of evidence has linked these disparities in outcomes to social determinants of health (SDH). SDH are defined by the WHO as “the non-medical factors that influence health outcomes.” These factors include but are not limited to income, education, social support, neighborhood of residence, and access to healthcare. Individuals who are negatively impacted by SDH have been shown to have a higher incidence of CRC. These individuals are also less likely to receive adequate CRC screening, are less likely to receive appropriate treatment, and have increased CRC mortality. Interventions that target different SDH domains have been shown to lead to increased rates of CRC screening and receipt of appropriate treatment while simultaneously improving CRC mortality. The aim of this review is to highlight the connection between SDH and CRC outcomes while also exploring interventions that target SDH and thereby improve CRC outcomes.

Opinion statement: In our clinical practice, we have shifted away from the use of adjuvant normothermic intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy, particularly following the publication of GOG 252. Our decision is rooted in the accumulating evidence indicating a lack of demonstrable superiority, alongside the recognized toxicities and logistical challenges associated with its administration. This strategic departure is also influenced by the rising utilization of maintenance therapies such as bevacizumab and PARP inhibitors, which present viable alternatives for improving patient outcomes. Our utilization of hyperthermic IP chemotherapy (HIPEC) is currently reserved for a specific cohort of patients, mirroring the patient population studied in the OVHIPEC-1 trial. Specifically, our HIPEC protocol applies to patients presenting with newly diagnosed stage IIIC high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer who are deemed ineligible for primary debulking surgery. Patients must exhibit at least stable disease with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy, maintain a favorable performance status (ECOG score 0-1), possess good nutritional reserves (with no evidence of protein-calorie malnutrition and an albumin level exceeding 3.5), and not have chronic kidney disease. When HIPEC is planned, it is administered at the time of interval debulking surgery, contingent upon the attainment of optimal surgical outcomes (< 1 cm of residual disease). Our HIPEC protocol adheres to the original OVHIPEC-1 trial guidelines, employing cisplatin at a dosage of 100 mg/m². We administer at least two antiemetics, antihistamines, and sodium thiosulfate to mitigate known side effects. Postoperatively, patients are admitted to the general surgical floor, reserving the intensive care unit for those in critical condition. We follow Enhanced Recovery After Surgery principles, incorporating early ambulation and feeding into our postoperative care strategy. We have encountered encouraging results with this approach, with most patients having largely uncomplicated postoperative courses and resuming adjuvant chemotherapy within 3 to 4 weeks of surgery.

Opinion statement: Treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer has undergone significant evolution in recent years, leading to substantial improvements in overall survival. Men are living longer than ever before with a median survival now which is almost 6 years. The timing and extent of metastatic disease combined with individual patient factors helps treatment recommendation of doublet therapy including androgen deprivation (ADT) plus either chemotherapy or androgen receptor signaling inhibition (ARSI) or triplet therapy with ADT+ARSI+chemotherapy. New treatments must continue to be developed to enhance survival with goals of cure. Better biomarkers that allow for more effective treatments will enhance disease control, quality of life, and survival.

Opinion statement: Seizure activity is common in patients with primary and metastatic brain tumors, affecting more than 50% of cases over the course of their disease. Several mechanisms contribute to brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE), including a pro-inflammatory environment, excessive secretion of glutamate and an increase in neuronal excitatory tone, reduction of GABAergic inhibitory activity, and an increase in 2-hydroxygluturate production in isocitrate dehydrogenase mutant tumors. After a verified seizure in a brain tumor patient, the consensus is that BTRE has developed, and it is necessary to initiate an antiepileptic drug (AED). It is not recommended to initiate AED prophylaxis. Second- and third-generation AEDs are the preferred options for initiation, due to a lack of hepatic enzyme induction and reduced likelihood for drug-drug interactions, especially in regard to neoplastic treatment. The efficacy of appropriate AEDs for patients with BTRE is fairly equivalent, although some data suggests that levetiracetam may be slightly more active in suppressing seizures than other AEDs. The consensus among most Neuro-Oncology providers is to initiate levetiracetam monotherapy after a first seizure in a brain tumor patient, as long as the patient does not have any psychiatric co-morbidities. If levetiracetam is not tolerated well or is ineffective, other appropriate initial AED options for monotherapy or as an add-on anticonvulsant include lacosamide, valproic acid, briviracetam, lamotrigine, and perampanel.