Current Treatment Options in Oncology最新文献

Opinion statement: Neuropathic cancer pain is experienced by 30-40% of patients with cancer. It significantly reduces quality of life and overall wellbeing for patients living with and beyond cancer. The underlying mechanisms of neuropathic pain in patients with cancer are complex and involve direct tumour involvement, nerve compression or infiltration, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy-induced nerve damage, or post-surgical complications. It is crucial for healthcare professionals to assess and manage neuropathic cancer pain effectively. There is increasing recognition that standardisation of neuropathic pain assessment leads to tailored management and improved patient outcomes. Pain management strategies, including medication, interventional analgesia, physical and complementary therapy, can help alleviate neuropathic pain and improve the patient's comfort and quality of life.

Opinion statement: Gastrointestinal cancers are a heterogenous group of cancers that share common risk factors with cardiovascular disease. Therapy for gastrointestinal cancers have improved cancer-specific outcomes at the cost of cardiotoxicity. The most common cardiotoxic therapies utilized in gastrointestinal cancers include conventional chemotherapy (including fluoropyrimidines and anthracyclines), targeted therapies including anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), and immunotherapy. It is important for clinicians managing patients with gastrointestinal cancers to be aware of potential cardiotoxicity associated with these agents.

Opinion statement: Navigating the complex landscape of breast cancer treatment involves distinct strategies for luminal and triple-negative subtypes. While neoadjuvant chemotherapy historically dominates the approach for aggressive triple-negative tumors, recent evidence highlights the transformative impact of immunotherapy, alongside chemotherapy, in reshaping treatment paradigms. In luminal cancers, endocrine therapy, notably aromatase inhibitors, demonstrates promising outcomes in postmenopausal patients with low-grade luminal A tumors. However, integrating targeted therapies like CDK4/6 inhibitors in neoadjuvant setting remains inconclusive. Identifying predictive factors for treatment response, especially in luminal tumors, poses a challenge, emphasizing the necessity for ongoing research. A multidisciplinary approach, tailored to individual patient profiles, is crucial for maximizing efficacy while minimizing toxicity. As we strive to optimize breast cancer management, a comprehensive understanding of the distinct characteristics and treatment implications of luminal and triple-negative subtypes, including the transformative role of immunotherapy, is essential for informed decision-making and personalized care.

Opinion statement: Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains an evolving field. Major challenges HCC transplant patients face today include liver organ donor shortages and the need for both better pre-transplant bridging/downstaging therapies and post-transplant HCC recurrence treatment options. The advent of immunotherapy and the demonstrated efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in multiple solid tumors including advanced/unresectable HCC hold promise in expanding both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant HCC transplant treatment regimen, though caution is needed with these immune modulating agents leading up to and following transplant. New options for pre-transplant HCC management will expand access to this curative option as well as ensure patients have adequate control of their HCC prior to transplant to maximize the utility of a liver donor. Machine perfusion has been an active area of investigation in recent years and could expand the organ donor pool, helping address current liver donor shortages. Finally, additional HCC biomarkers such as AFP-L3 and DCP have shown promise in improving risk stratification of HCC patients. Together, these three recent advancements will likely alter HCC transplant guidelines in the coming years.

Opinion statement: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) represents the predominant cancer in pediatric populations, though its occurrence in adults is relatively rare. Pre-treatment risk stratification is crucial for predicting prognosis. Important factors for assessment include patient age, white blood cell (WBC) count at diagnosis, extramedullary involvement, immunophenotype, and cytogenetic aberrations. Minimal residual disease (MRD), primarily assessed by flow cytometry following remission, plays a substantial role in guiding management plans. Over the past decade, significant advancements in ALL outcomes have been witnessed. Conventional chemotherapy has remarkably reduced mortality rates; however, its intensive nature raises safety concerns and has led to the emergence of treatment-resistant cases with recurrence of relapses. Consequently, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved several novel treatments for relapsed/refractory ALL due to their demonstrated efficacy, as indicated by improved complete remission and survival rates. These treatments include tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody blinatumomab, anti-CD22 inotuzumab ozogamicin, anti-CD20 rituximab, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Identifying the variables that influence treatment decisions is a pressing necessity for tailoring therapy based on heterogeneous patient characteristics. Key predictive factors identified in various observational studies and clinical trials include prelymphodepletion disease burden, complex genetic abnormalities, and MRD. Furthermore, the development of serious adverse events following treatment could be anticipated through predictive models, allowing for appropriate prophylactic measures to be considered. The ultimate aim is to incorporate the concept of precision medicine in the field of ALL through valid prediction platform to facilitate the selection of the most suitable treatment approach.

Opinion statement: This perspective underscores the evolution and significance of neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer, tracing its history and efficacy in improving outcomes. It delves into the correlation between achieving complete response and long-term survival, emphasizing the predictive value of treatment response estimation. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer, particularly with taxanes and anti-HER2 therapies, emerges as a cornerstone, offering enhanced breast conservation rates and prognostic insights. The focus on individualized care, tailored to treatment response, underscores the need for adaptive strategies. Additionally, the article discusses the ongoing debate surrounding anthracyclines' role and the benefits of dual HER2 blockade. Ultimately, advocating for a personalized approach, guided by treatment response assessment, ensures optimal outcomes in HER2-positive breast cancer management.

Opinion statement: In addressing Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia (GTN), it is imperative to acknowledge the evolving landscape of treatment options, especially in light of the challenges posed by traditional methods. While historically, surgical interventions, radiation therapy, and chemotherapeutic agents have been the mainstays, the emergence of resistance and high-risk scenarios necessitates a reevaluation of our therapeutic approaches. Our review highlights the promising advancements in immunotherapy and molecular targeted therapy as viable alternatives for GTN management. The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors and kinase inhibitors offers a paradigm shift, particularly for patients resistant to conventional chemotherapy regimens. These novel therapies not only exhibit efficacy but also demonstrate manageable toxicity profiles, particularly in high-risk cases. However, integrating these innovative treatments into established international guidelines presents a formidable task. As we move forward, it is imperative that future research not only prioritizes fertility preservation but also rigorously evaluates long-term toxicity implications. International collaboration becomes pivotal in addressing the nuances of this rare and complex disease. In conclusion, our review underscores the need for a nuanced approach to GTN treatment, one that prioritizes reduced toxicity and improved quality of life. By embracing the advancements in immunotherapy and molecular targeted therapy, we can pave the way for more effective and patient-centered care in the management of GTN.

Opinion statement: For adult patients diagnosed with relapsed B cell-ALL (B-ALL), there have been significant improvements in available treatment options following the FDA approval of novel cellular and immunotherapy approaches - blinatumomab, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T therapy, and inotuzumab. For the last several years, research has focused on gaining a better understanding of the effects of specific disease and patient characteristics on long-term outcomes with each of the FDA-approved agents. In combination with the better prevention and management of unique, treatment-specific toxicities, providers can now select the best available treatment option for each individual patient diagnosed with relapsed, adult B-ALL needing therapy. This has allowed more patients to proceed to consolidative hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), and long-term data has even brought into question the need for HSCT for long-term durable remission for all patients. However, with the adoption of blinatumomab, CAR T therapy, and inotuzumab in front-line treatment regimens, it remains unclear what effects this will have on patients with relapsed B-ALL following exposure to these novel cellular and immunotherapy therapies. Unlike B-ALL, similar advances have unfortunately not yet been realized in T cell-ALL (T-ALL). Currently, new therapeutic approaches are underway to utilize similar targeting strategies that have been successful in B-ALL - monoclonal antibodies, bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTE), and CAR T therapy. Like B-ALL, the only existing approved therapy for relapsed T-ALL, nelarabine, is now used in the upfront treatment setting potentially limiting its utility in relapsed disease. Over the next several years, the hope is for patients diagnosed with T-ALL to experience the drastic improvement in outcomes as has been seen for patients diagnosed with B-ALL over the last decade.

Opinion statement: Cardiac dysfunction is a serious adverse effect of cancer therapies that can interfere with quality of life and impact long-term survival in patients with cancer. Hematopoietic cell transplantation is a potentially curative therapy for many advanced hematologic malignancies and bone marrow failure syndromes, however is associated with several short- and long-term adverse effects, including importantly, cardiovascular toxicities. The goal of this review article is to describe the cardiovascular events that may develop before, during, and after hematopoietic cell transplantation, review risk factors for short- and long-term cardiovascular toxicities, discuss approaches to cardiovascular risk stratification and evaluation, and highlight the research gaps in the consideration of cardiovascular disease in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation. Further understanding of cardiovascular events and the factors associated with cardiovascular disease will hopefully lead to novel interventions in managing and mitigating the significant long-term burden of late cardiovascular effects in transplant survivors.

Opinion statement: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are a rare and heterogeneous group of cancers. Treatment options have changed little in the past thirty years, and the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is controversial. Accurate risk stratification is crucial in STS in order to facilitate clinical discussions around peri-operative treatment. Current risk stratification tools used in clinic, such as Sarculator, use clinicopathological characteristics and may be specific to anatomical site or to histology. More recently, risk stratification tools have been developed using molecular or immunological data. Combining Sarculator with other risk stratification tools may identify novel patient groups with differential clinical outcomes. There are several considerations when translating risk stratification tools into widespread clinical use, including establishing clinical utility, health economic value, being applicable to existing clinical pathways, having strong real-world performance, and being supported by investment into infrastructure. Future work may include incorporation of novel modalities and data integration techniques.