Outcome and Safety of Sorafenib in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Dialysis Patients: A Systematic Review.

Few data are available about sorafenib use in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) undergoing hemodialysis. No systematic review has been previously performed about this issue. The objective of the present review is to investigate pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes of sorafenib in mRCC patients undergoing hemodialysis. According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, all the literature about mRCC dialysis patients receiving sorafenib, published from January 1946 to August 2015, was evaluated. Applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 11 articles were selected for the analysis; 1 patient from our department was also included. The investigated outcomes were pharmacokinetics, toxicity, response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival where available. A total of 36 patients were included. Median treatment duration was 6.0 months on overall population; median progression-free survival was 6.3 months (calculated on 19 patients); response rate was 22% (on 29 patients); median overall survival was 14.9 months (on 28 patients). Of note, 24 patients started sorafenib at reduced dose; 6 of 36 patients (17%) required dose reduction due to adverse events (AEs). Sorafenib treatment was discontinued in 7 patients (19%) because of AEs. Most of AEs were Grade 1-2; severe toxicities (Grade 4-5) included G4 anemia (1 case), G4 hypertension (1 case), G4 cerebellar hemorrhage (1 patient), and a case of G5 subarachnoid hemorrhage. This review confirmed the efficacy of sorafenib treatment in mRCC patients receiving hemodialysis. Nevertheless, drug toxicity seems to be increased in these patients, despite the initiation of therapy at reduced doses; therefore, sorafenib should be used with caution in dialysis patients.

Estimating the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older patients with cancer: The role of the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13).

OBJECTIVE: Some parameters of the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) are predictive of chemotherapy toxicity. The Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) is a short instrument that has been tested as a means of identifying patients who need a full CGA, but its ability to predict chemotherapy toxicity is still unclear. We performed a pooled analysis of four published clinical trials studying VES-13 as a means of diagnosing vulnerability, in order to evaluate its accuracy in predicting the risk of grade 3/4 toxicity in older patients undergoing chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved patients aged ≥ 66 years with a diagnosis of solid or hematological cancer, all of whom were administered VES-13. The number of medications taken by each patient, their comorbidities, their Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G) score and index, the type of chemotherapy and treatment line, and their Mini Mental State Evaluation (MMSE), and Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) scores were recorded. Information was available concerning the grades 3-4 hematological and non-hematological toxicities experienced by each patient. RESULTS: The study involved 648 patients aged ≥ 66 years (mean age 76.2±4.5, range 66-90) of whom 336 (51.9%) were female. VES-13 identified 287 patients (44.3%) as vulnerable. Grades 3-4 hematological and non-hematological toxicities were more prevalent in the vulnerable subjects (35.2% vs 20.8%, p<0.0001, and 18.5% vs 10.8%, p=0.0055), who were also at higher risk of both (adjusted ORs 2.15, 95% CI 1.46-3.17, p<0.001); and 1.66 (95% CI 1.02-2.72, p=0.043). CONCLUSIONS: VES-13 could be considered to be a good candidate for future prospective studies to assess older patients with cancer at risk of toxicity.

Response to chemotherapy is predictive in relation to longer overall survival in an individual patient combined-analysis with pleural mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: There is currently no early predictive marker of survival for patients receiving chemotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Tumour response may be predictive for overall survival (OS), though this has not been explored. We have thus undertaken a combined-analysis of OS, from a 42day landmark, of 526 patients receiving systemic therapy for MPM. We also validate published progression-free survival rates (PFSRs) and a progression-free survival (PFS) prognostic-index model. METHODS: Analyses included nine MPM clinical trials incorporating six European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) studies. Analysis of OS from landmark (from day 42 post-treatment) was considered regarding tumour response. PFSR analysis data included six non-EORTC MPM clinical trials. Prognostic index validation was performed on one non-EORTC data-set, with available survival data. RESULTS: Median OS, from landmark, of patients with partial response (PR) was 12·8months, stable disease (SD), 9·4months and progressive disease (PD), 3·4months. Both PR and SD were associated with longer OS from landmark compared with disease progression (both p<0·0001). PFSRs for platinum-based combination therapies were consistent with published significant clinical activity ranges. Effective separation between PFS and OS curves provided a validation of the EORTC prognostic model, based on histology, stage and performance status. CONCLUSION: Response to chemotherapy is associated with significantly longer OS from landmark in patients with MPM.

Anti-androgen therapy suspension following prolonged clinical and biochemical response: outcomes in a series of elderly patients with advanced prostate cancer.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: To describe the outcomes following the suspension of androgen-suppression therapy in a series of elderly patients in an advanced stage of prostate cancer and in prolonged clinical and biochemical response. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Of 371 consecutive patients with advanced prostate cancer and treated with androgen-suppression therapy, 44 older patients were defined as in stable response on the basis of the following: absence of noteworthy dysuria, normal prostate findings on digital rectal examination, and prostate-specific antigen values lower than 0.50 ng/ml. After suspending treatment, it was to be re-scheduled in case of onset of dysuria, evidence of a palpable lesion on digital rectal examination, or a rise in prostate-specific antigen above 10 ng/ml. Progression of disease was defined as a prostate-specific antigen level increase at two subsequent measurements, and/or the appearance of new lesions, and/or evidence of progression of disease on digital rectal examination. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Median age of patients was 78.5 years at the moment of therapy suspension. After a median follow-up of 93.9 months, fourteen patients (31.8%) showed progression of disease, but only 7 (15.9%) of these died. In 7 (15.9%) patients, serum testosterone levels did not exceed 0.5 ng/ml, indicating an absence of gonadal activity. The median time to progression was 138.2 months, and the median cumulative survival from the start and from the suspension of androgen-suppression therapy was 105.5 months and 64.1 months, respectively. The savings in drug costs amounted to 772,267 Euro. Taking into consideration these outcomes of survival and of savings in drug costs, we can conclude that in these selected elderly patients, this treatment option could be of interest.

Single-agent pemetrexed for chemonaïve and pretreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: results of an International Expanded Access Program.

INTRODUCTION: Pemetrexed has established efficacy, and is the backbone for chemotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). An International Expanded Access Program provided >3000 mesothelioma patients with access to single-agent pemetrexed or pemetrexed plus platinum analogs (cisplatin or carboplatin) in 13 countries. In this article, we report the safety and efficacy data of MPM patients who were treated with single-agent pemetrexed (n = 812). METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed MPM, not amenable to curative surgery, received pemetrexed (500 mg/m) once (day 1) every 21 days with standard premedication and vitamin supplementation. Investigator-determined response and survival data were recorded at the end of study participation. Myelosuppression data were also collected. RESULTS: All 812 MPM patients (319 chemonaïve; 493 pretreated) received single-agent pemetrexed (>or=1 dose) and were evaluated for safety. A total of 643 patients (247 chemonaïve, 396 pretreated) were evaluated for efficacy. Of the chemonaïve patients evaluated for efficacy (n = 247), the overall response rate was 10.5%, median time to progressive disease (TTPD) was 6.0 months, and median survival was 14.1 month. Of the pretreated patients evaluated for efficacy (n = 396), the overall response rate was 12.1%, median TTPD was 4.9 months, and the median survival was not estimable due to high censoring. Common terminology criteria grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was mild in both groups, with neutropenia (<18%) as the main toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: In the present expanded access program, single-agent pemetrexed demonstrated promising activity in MPM in both chemonaïve and pretreated patients, with TTPD of 6.0 and 4.9 months, respectively, 1-year survival >or=54.7%, and mild hematologic toxicity.

Cisplatin and gemcitabine in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a phase II study.

Aims of this study were to evaluate the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Patients with histologically proven MPM, < 75 years of age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) < or = 2, and measurable MPM were eligible. Patients received gemcitabine 1250 mg/m intravenously on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 75 mg/m on day 2, every 21 days, for a maximum of 6 cycles. From May 1999 to May 2001, 35 chemonaive patients (median age, 61 years) were enrolled. A total of 177 cycles were administered (median 5 cycles; range 1 to 6). One patient was not evaluable for response and toxicity. Nine (26%) patients had partial responses, 11 (32%) patients had progressive disease, and 14 (41%) stable disease. Median survival for all patients was 13 months. Median progression-free survival was 8 months. Grade 3 (World Health Organization) nausea and vomiting occurred in 35% of patients. Grade 3/4 anemia, grade 3/4 thrombocythemia, and grade 3/4 neutropenia were assessed in 24%, 52%, and 61% of patients, respectively. All other side effects were mild. In conclusion, gemcitabine-cisplatin combination seems to be moderately active in MPM. Furthermore, at this dose and schedule, the toxicity profile could be acceptable.

Single-agent gemcitabine in previously untreated elderly patients with advanced bladder carcinoma: response to treatment and correlation with the comprehensive geriatric assessment.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed at evaluating the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine monochemotherapy in a unselected series of elderly patients with advanced bladder cancer. The secondary objectives were to establish whether there is a correlation between treatment and Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) and, in addition, to determine overall patient survival. METHODS: Treatment consisted of six courses of chemotherapy with gemcitabine at a dosage of 1,200 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, every 21 days. CGA, as described by Gruppo Italiano di Oncologia Geriatrica, was assessed for evaluating the functional status of patients before, during, and after treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled (M/F 22/3), 22 of these were evaluable for response and 23 for toxicity. Characteristics of patients: median age 76 years (range 71-87); ECOG performance status (PS) 1 in 12 patients and 2 in 13 patients; clinical stage III in 6 patients and IV in 19 patients. At the end of the therapy the parameters of CGA improved in 4 cases (17%), remained unchanged in 17 cases (74%) and worsened only in 2 cases (9%). Two patients were not evaluable. Response evaluation showed 3 (13.5%) complete responses (CRs) and 7 (32%) partial responses (PRs), for an overall response rate of 45.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 24.3-65.7%]. Three (13.5%) patients had stable disease (SD ) and 9 (41%) disease progression (DP). Median overall survival was 8 months and median time to progression was 5 months. Treatment was generally well tolerated, with 1 patient having grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity and 3 having grade 4 neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that gemcitabine can be safely administered in monochemotherapy, is effective and does not worsen the functional status of elderly patients with advanced bladder cancer.