Novel systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma: a step-by-step review of current indications

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer and the main cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The available treatment options for HCC include liver transplant, locoregional therapy (such as ablation, embolization, and radiotherapy), and systemic treatment. The latter encompasses targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and angiogenesis inhibitors, alone or in combination. The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted drug therapy has been one of the most significant advances in HCC treatment. These therapies were shown to prolong overall survival and progression-free survival in clinical trials including patients with advanced HCC. In recent years, the systemic treatment of advanced HCC has vastly improved, with a median survival of 19.2 months in the IMbrave150 trial. However, further research is needed to determine the optimal sequence of treatment

Novel systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma: a step-by-step review of current indications

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer and the main cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The available treatment options for HCC include liver transplant, locoregional therapy (such as ablation, embolization, and radiotherapy), and systemic treatment. The latter encompasses targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and angiogenesis inhibitors, alone or in combination. The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted drug therapy has been one of the most significant advances in HCC treatment. These therapies were shown to prolong overall survival and progression-free survival in clinical trials including patients with advanced HCC. In recent years, the systemic treatment of advanced HCC has vastly improved, with a median survival of 19.2 months in the IMbrave150 trial. However, further research is needed to determine the optimal sequence of treatment

Immunotherapy or targeted therapy as first-line treatment of patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with the BRAF mutation — a single-center analysis

Introduction. One of the most important achievements of contemporary oncology is the discovery of new therapeutic possibilities: targeted therapy and immunotherapy associated with checkpoint inhibitors. It has not been unequivocally determined so far which therapy should be used as first-line treatment in patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with the BRAF mutation. Material and methods. 137 patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with the BRAF mutation were analyzed. They received anti-PD1-1 therapy (IT) or molecularly targeted therapy iBRAF ± iMEK (TT) as first-line treatment in the scope of the national drug program. IT and TT therapies used as first-line treatment were compared. Results. Median OS and PFS in the group were 14.0 and 7.3 months. Unfavorable prognostic factors for OS and PFS were metastases to the central nervous system, increased LDH levels and performance status > 1. Metastatic sites in > 2 locations were only unfavorable prognostic factors for OS. A statistically significant difference was found between TT and IT for OS (p = 0.0011; median for TT was 12.6 months and was not reached for IT). It should be noted that the group treated with TT was characterized by a worse prognostic factors. No differences in PFS were observed (p = 0.292, medians 7.2 and 9.0 months, respectively). Conclusion. In patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with a BRAF mutation without rapid progression, IT should be considered as first-line therapy.Introduction. One of the most important achievements of contemporary oncology is the discovery of new therapeutic possibilities: targeted therapy and immunotherapy associated with checkpoint inhibitors. It has not been unequivocally determined so far which therapy should be used as first-line treatment in patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with the BRAF mutation. Material and methods. 137 patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with the BRAF mutation were analyzed. They received anti-PD1-1 therapy (IT) or molecularly targeted therapy iBRAF ± iMEK (TT) as first-line treatment in the scope of the national drug program. IT and TT therapies used as first-line treatment were compared. Results. Median OS and PFS in the group were 14.0 and 7.3 months. Unfavorable prognostic factors for OS and PFS were metastases to the central nervous system, increased LDH levels and performance status > 1. Metastatic sites in > 2 locations were only unfavorable prognostic factors for OS. A statistically significant difference was found between TT and IT for OS (p = 0.0011; median for TT was 12.6 months and was not reached for IT). It should be noted that the group treated with TT was characterized by a worse prognostic factors. No differences in PFS were observed (p = 0.292, medians 7.2 and 9.0 months, respectively). Conclusion. In patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma with a BRAF mutation without rapid progression, IT should be considered as first-line therapy

Real-life data of abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide treatment in post-chemotherapy metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in Poland

BackgroundAbiraterone acetate (ABI) and Enzalutamide (ENZA) are second-generation hormone drugs that show breakthrough activity in post-chemotherapy, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The leading oncological and urological guidelines indicate both drugs with the same strong recommendation. There is a lack of randomized trials which compare the efficacy of ABI and ENZA. The current study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the drugs with an analysis of prognostic factors related to those drugs.Patients and methodsThe study included 420 patients with docetaxel (DXL) pretreated mCRPC from seven Polish cancer centers. Patients were treated according to inclusion and exclusion criteria in the Polish national drug program (1000 mg ABI and 10 mg prednisone, n=76.2%; ENZA, 160 mg; n=23.8%). The study retrospectively analyzed the overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF), PSA 50% decline rate (PSA 50%) and selected clinic-pathological data.ResultsIn the study group, the median OS was 17 months (95% CI: 15.6-18.3). The median OS (26.1 vs. 15.7 mo.; p<0.001), TTF (14.2 vs. 7.6 mo.; p<0.001) and PSA 50% (87.5 vs. 56%; p<0.001) were higher in ENZA than in ABI treatment. Multivariate analysis shows that ENZA treatment and PSA nadir <17.35 ng/mL during or after DXL treatment were related to longer TTF. ENZA treatment, DXL dose ≥750 mg, PSA nadir <17.35 ng/mL during or after DXL treatment was related to longer OS.ConclusionsENZA treatment may be related to more favorable oncological outcomes than ABI treatment in the studied Polish population of patients. A 50% decline in PSA is an indicator of longer TTF and OS. Due to the non-randomized and retrospective nature of the analysis, the current results require prospective validation

Leczenie pierwszej linii przerzutowego raka brodawkowatego nerki z komponentą raka jasnokomórkowego z zastosowaniem kabozantynibu

W pracy przedstawiono przypadek 47-letniego chorego z rozpoznanym rakiem brodawkowatym nerki z komponentą raka jasnokomórkowego (do 30% utkania guza). U pacjenta, po 6 miesiącach od leczenia radykalnego, stwierdzono rozsiew raka nerki do płuc, węzłów chłonnych klatki piersiowej i jamy brzusznej, wszczepy do opłucnej oraz płyn w prawej jamie opłucnowej. W chwili rozpoznania choroby przerzutowej pacjent, z uwagi na wynik histopatologiczny, nie mógł otrzymać terapii inhibitorami kinaz tyrozynowych w ramach podstawowego finansowania przez Narodowy Fundusz Zdrowia (NFZ). Wobec powyższego wystąpiono i uzyskano zgodę Konsultanta Wojewódzkiego na terapię kabozantynibem jako ratunkowego dostępu do technologii lekowych (RDTL). W trakcie terapii u Pacjenta stwierdzono większość działań niepożądanych, które można zaobserwować podczas terapii kabozantynibem. Aktualnie są one skutecznie kontrolowane. W wyniku stosowanego leczenia celowanego uzyskano częściową remisję choroby. Pacjent dotychczas otrzymał 19 serii terapii

Immunoterapia czy terapia celowana w pierwszej linii leczenia chorych na zaawansowane/rozsiane czerniaki z obecnością mutacji BRAF — analiza jednoośrodkowa

Wstęp. Jednym z najważniejszych osiągnięć współczesnej onkologii jest odkrycie nowych możliwości terapeutycznych: terapii celowanej oraz immunoterapii związanej z inhibitorami punktów kontrolnych. Dotychczas nie ustalono jednoznacznie, która terapia powinna być zastosowana jako leczenie pierwszej linii u chorych na zaawansowane/rozsiane czerniaki z obecnością mutacji BRAF.Materiał i metody. Analizą objęto 137 chorych na zaawansowane/przerzutowe czerniaki z obecną mutacją BRAF, otrzymujących w ramach programów lekowych immunoterapię anty-PD-1 (IT) lub terapię ukierunkowaną molekularnie iBRAF ± iMEK (TT) jako leczenie pierwszej linii. Porównano terapie IT i TT stosowane jako leczenie pierwszej linii.Wyniki. Mediany czasu przeżycia całkowitego (OS) i czasu wolnego od progresji choroby (PFS) w całej badanej grupie wyniosły odpowiednio 14,0 i 7,3 miesiąca. Niekorzystnymi czynnikami rokowniczymi w zakresie OS i PFS były przerzuty do ośrodkowego układu nerwowego, podwyższona aktywność dehydrogenazy mleczanowej oraz stan sprawności > 1. Obecność przerzutów w > 2 lokalizacjach była niekorzystnym czynnikiem rokowniczym tylko w zakresie OS. Wykazano znamiennie statystyczną różnicę pomiędzy terapiami TT i IT w zakresie OS (p = 0,0011; mediana dla TT wyniosła 12,6 miesiąca, nie osiągnięto mediany dla IT). Należy jednak zaznaczyć, że grupa leczona TT charakteryzowała się gorszymi czynnikami prognostycznymi. Nie wykazano różnicy w zakresie PFS (p = 0,292; mediana dla TT 7,2 miesiąca, mediana dla IT 9,0 miesięcy).Wnioski. U chorych na zaawansowane/przerzutowe czerniaki z obecną mutacją BRAF bez gwałtownej progresji IT powinna być rozważana jako leczenie pierwszej linii