Cancer treatment reviews最新文献

The therapeutic landscape for early breast cancer (eBC) has expanded by introducing novel anticancer agents into clinical practice. During their reproductive years, women with eBC should be informed of the potential risk of premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) and infertility with the proposed systemic therapy. Although the topic of female fertility is becoming increasingly relevant in patients with cancer, limited information is available on the gonadotoxicity of new agents available for eBC treatment. Analyses from clinical trials and prospective data on ovarian function biomarkers are lacking.

The purpose of this systematic review is to report the available preclinical and clinical data on female fertility risk with the use of the new agents that are part of clinical practice use or under development for eBC management. This review highlights the clear need to perform additional research efforts to improve our understanding on the gonoadtoxicity of new anticancer agents.

Breast cancer diagnosed in premenopausal women tends to be more aggressive and the benefit of ovarian function suppression (OFS), at least in certain groups of patients, is well known. There is hesitancy in using OFS in some groups of patients who may otherwise benefit from the treatment. For instance, it is clear that in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), high-risk, early-stage breast cancer, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) should be given in the adjuvant setting; however, confusion remains whether premenopausal patients with intermediate-risk disease benefit from GnRHa, given the lack of consensus on its definition in guidelines and clinical practice. Most recent evidence on the long-term efficacy of GnRHa, with up to 20-years of follow-up, reinforced its benefits in premenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer. In this comprehensive review, we reviewed the long-term efficacy in terms of improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for early-stage HR+ breast cancer and examined evidence from multiple randomized clinical studies to identify the clinicopathological characteristics that correlated with improved DFS and OS with the addition of OFS to adjuvant endocrine therapy. Other aspects of GnRHa, including its efficacy in advanced breast cancer, safety profile, evidence in ovarian function preservation, and the advantages of long-acting formulations were also discussed. By addressing the existing gaps and grey areas regarding the inclusion of OFS as a crucial treatment component for premenopausal breast cancer patients, physicians are more aware of who to administer and the potential impact on survival outcomes.

Advancements in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, with early phase clinical trials (EPCTs) serving as important initial steps in evaluating novel therapies. Recent studies have shown that response rates in these trials have doubled in the last twenty years. Patients who enroll on EPCTs have advanced cancer and heightened symptomatology yet maintain a robust performance status that qualifies them for clinical trial participation. It is well established that many of these patients have needs that can be addressed by palliative care, including symptom management, value assessments, advance care planning, and psychosocial and spiritual support. Several small studies have aimed to identify the most beneficial palliative care intervention for this cohort of patients, ranging from formal clinic-based multidisciplinary palliative care interventions to home-based interventions. While outcomes have trended towards benefit for patients, especially pertaining to psychological well-being, most studies were not powered to detect additional benefits for improved physical symptom management, reduction in care utilization or increased length of time on trial. In this review, we discuss the unique palliative care needs of this population and what we can learn from results of past interventional studies. We advocate for a tailored palliative care approach that acknowledges the time toxicity experienced by patients enrolled in EPCTs and address challenges posed by shortages within the palliative care workforce.

DNA–damage repair (DDR) pathways alterations, a growing area of interest in oncology, are detected in about 20% of patient with prostate cancer and are associated with improved sensitivity to poly(ADP ribose) polymerases (PARP) inhibitors. In May 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved two PARP inhibitors (olaparib and rucaparib) for prostate cancer treatment. Moreover, germline aberrations in DDR pathways genes have also been related to familial or hereditary prostate cancer, requiring tailored health-care programs. These emerging scenarios are rapidly changing diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic approaches in prostate cancer management. The aim of this review is to highlight the five W-points of DDR pathways in prostate cancer: why targeting DDR pathways in prostate cancer; what we should test for genomic profiling in prostate cancer; “where” testing genetic assessment in prostate cancer (germline or somatic, solid or liquid biopsy); when genetic testing is appropriate in prostate cancer; who could get benefit from PARP inhibitors; how improve patients outcome with combinations strategies.

Immunotherapy has revolutionized cancer therapy and now represents a standard of care for many tumor types, including triple-negative breast cancer. Despite the positive results that have led to the approval of immunotherapy in both early- and advanced-stage triple-negative breast cancer, pivotal clinical trials cannot address the myriad questions arising in everyday clinical practice, often falling short in delivering all the information that clinicians require. In this manuscript, we aim to address some of these practical questions, with the purpose of providing clinicians with a guide for optimizing the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the management of breast cancer patients and identifying opportunities for future research to clarify unresolved questions.

The intricate epigenetic landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is profoundly influenced by alterations in DNA methylation patterns. Understanding these alterations is crucial for unraveling the molecular mechanisms underlying HCC pathogenesis. Methylated circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) presents itself as an encouraging avenue for biomarker discovery and holds substantial clinical implications in HCC management. This review comprehensively outlines the studies concerning DNA methylation in HCC and underscores the significance of methylated ctDNA within this context. Moreover, a variety of cfDNA methylation-based methodologies, such as 5hmC profiling, bisulfite-based, restriction enzyme-dependent, and enrichment-based methods, provide in-depth insights into the molecular pathology of HCC. Additionally, the integration of methylated ctDNA analysis into clinical practice represents a significant advancement in personalized HCC management. By facilitating cancer screening, prognosis assessment, and treatment response prediction, the utilization of methylated ctDNA signifies a pivotal stride toward enhancing patient care and outcomes in HCC.

Therapeutic agents targeting Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) demonstrated to positively impact the prognosis of HER2-positive breast cancer. HER2-positive breast cancer can present either as hormone receptor-negative or positive, defining Triple-positive breast cancer (TPBC). TPBC demonstrate unique gene expression profiles, showing reduced HER2-driven gene expression, as recapitulated by a higher proportion of Luminal-type intrinsic subtypes. The different molecular landscape of TPBC dictates distinctive clinical features, including reduced chemotherapy sensitivity, different patterns of recurrence, and better overall prognosis. Cross-talk between HER2 and hormone receptor signaling seems to be critical to determine resistance to HER2-directed agents. Accordingly, superior outcomes have been achieved with the use of endocrine therapy, representing the first subtype-specific pharmacological intervention unique to this subgroup. Additional targeted agents capable to tackle resistance mechanisms to anti-HER2, hormone agents, or both might further improve the efficacy of treatments, such as PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors, particularly in a biomarker-enriched setting, and CDK4/6-inhibitors, with preliminary data suggesting a role of PAM50 subtyping to predict higher benefits in luminal tumors. Finally, the distinct biology of triple-positive tumors may yield the rationale for considering combinations within antibody-drug conjugate regimens. Accordingly, in this review, we summarized the current evidence and rationale for considering TPBC as a different entity, in which distinct therapeutical approaches leveraging on the different biological profile of TPBC may result in superior anticancer regimens and improved patient-centric outcomes.

Background

Local resection (LR) methods for rectal cancer are generally considered in the palliative setting or for patients deemed a high anaesthetic risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare oncological outcomes of LR and radical resection (RR) for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance assessment.

Methods

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Emcare databases was performed for studies that reported data on clinical outcomes for both LR and RR for early rectal cancer from January 1995 to April 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. The quality of assessment was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool for randomised controlled trials.

Results

Twenty studies with 12,022 patients were included: 6,476 patients had LR and 5,546 patients underwent RR. RR led to an improvement in 5-year overall survival (OR 1.84; 95 % CI 1.54–2.20; p < 0.0001; I² 20 %) and local recurrence (OR 3.06; 95 % CI 2.02–4.64; p < 0.0001; I² 39 %) when compared to LR. However, when staging and surveillance methods were clearly adopted in LR cases, there was an improvement in R0 rates (96.7 % vs 85.6 %), 5-year disease-free survival (93.0 % vs 77.9 %) and overall survival (81.6 % vs 79.0 %) compared to when staging and surveillance was not reported/performed.

Conclusions

LR may be appropriate for selected patients without poor prognostic factors in early rectal cancer. This study also highlights that there is currently no single standardised staging or surveillance approach being adopted in the management of early rectal cancer. A more specified and standardised preoperative staging for patient selection as well as clinical and image-based surveillance protocols is needed.

Surgery is a standard treatment for early-stage gastrointestinal cancers, often preceded by neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy or followed by adjuvant therapy. While leading to cure in a proportion of patients, it has some drawbacks such as intra/post-operative complications, mutilation and life-long functional sequelae. Further to the unprecedented efficacy data from studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced mismatch repair deficient/microsatellite instable (dMMR/MSI-H) tumours, a strong interest has recently emerged for the investigation of such agents in the neoadjuvant setting. Although limited by the exploratory design and small sample size, trials of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors for early-stage dMMR/MSI-H gastrointestinal cancers have consistently reported complete response rates ranging from 70 % to 100 %. As a result, the question has arisen as to whether surgery is still needed or organ-preserving strategies should be offered to this especially immuno-sensitive population. In this article, we discuss the available evidence for neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors in dMMR/MSI-H gastrointestinal cancers and analyse opportunities and challenges to the implementation of non-operative management approaches in this setting.

Chemotherapy associated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors is currently the standard of care in several tumor indications. This combination approach improves progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and complete pathological response (pCR) in several cancer types both in the early and metastatic approaches. However, the distinct spectrum of toxicities between cytotoxic side effects and immune related adverse events (irAEs) with similar clinical presentations and different management strategies remains a challenge in daily practice for healthcare professionals. This review summarizes the most common toxicities reported in the randomized clinical trials that led to the subsequent FDA approval of these combinations, across tumor indications. We cite in particular: non-small cell lung cancer, small cell lung cancer, triple negative breast cancer, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, gastric carcinoma, esophageal carcinoma, cervical carcinoma and biliary tract carcinoma.

We found that the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy was associated with an increased incidence of all grade adverse events (RR 1.11 [1.09; 1.12]) without an excess in treatment related mortality when compared to chemotherapy alone. We report also an increase in the incidence of serious adverse events (grade ≥ 3) (RR 1.16 [1.10;1.24]); in particular: high grade diarrhea, dyspnea, fatigue, rash and elevated liver enzymes.

Together with the collaboration of our institutional network of organ specialists with expertise in irAEs, we propose practical recommendations for physicians to enhance clinical care and management of patients undergoing treatment with combined ICI immunotherapy and chemotherapy.