Pneumothorax following combination chemotherapy with bevacizumab: A case report and review of the literature

Bevacizumab (BV) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits angiogenesis by targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The addition of BV to combination chemotherapy has been shown to improve the outcomes in several malignancies, including colorectal carcinoma (CRC). However, the use of BV has been associated with adverse effects, including hypertension, hemorrhage, proteinuria, delayed wound healing and bowel perforation. Pneumothorax (PTX) as an adverse event associated with BV use has rarely been reported. We herein report the case of a 68-year-old female patient with a history of metastatic CRC treated with combination chemotherapy, including BV, who presented with complaints of shortness of breath and was found to have a right-sided PTX

Changes in plasma biomarkers following treatment with cabozantinib in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a post hoc analysis of an extension cohort of a phase II trial

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is an orally available inhibitor of tyrosine kinases including VEGFR2 and c-MET. We performed a post hoc analysis to find associations between select plasma biomarkers and treatment response in patients (pts) with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who received cabozantinib 100 mg daily as part of a phase 2 non-randomized expansion cohort (NCT00940225). METHODS: Plasma samples were collected at baseline, 6 weeks and at time of maximal response from 81 mCRPC pts with bone metastases, of which 33 also had measurable soft-tissue disease. Levels of 27 biomarkers were measured in duplicate using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for the association between biomarker levels or their change on treatment and either bone scan response (BSR) or soft tissue response according to RECIST. RESULTS: A BSR and RECIST response were seen in 66/81 pts (81 %) and 6/33 pts (18 %) respectively. No significant associations were found between any biomarker at any time point and either type of response. Plasma concentrations of VEGFA, FLT3L, c-MET, AXL, Gas6A, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, interleukin-8 and the hypoxia markers CA9 and clusterin significantly increased during treatment with cabozantinib irrespective of response. The plasma concentrations of VEGFR2, Trap5b, Angiopoietin-2, TIMP-2 and TIE-2 significantly decreased during treatment with caboznatinib. CONCLUSIONS: Our data did not reveal plasma biomarkers associated with response to cabozantinib. The observed alterations in several biomarkers during treatment with cabozantinib may provide insights on the effects of cabozantinib on tumor cells and on tumor micro-environment and may help point to potential co-targeting approaches

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I : Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

Background: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. Objective: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. Design, setting, and participants: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members (“panellists”) who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1–3. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. Results and limitations: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. Conclusions: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. Patient summary: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.publishedVersionPeer reviewe

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/high-risk and locally advanced disease, biochemical relapse, and side effects of hormonal treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of European Association of Urology. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2022.11.002Background: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. Objective: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. Design, setting, and participants: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members (“panellists”) who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1–3. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. Results and limitations: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. Conclusions: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. Patient summary: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.We gratefully acknowledge the following organisations for providing financial support for the APCCC 2022: The City of Lugano and Movember Foundation. Ros Eeles is supported by a National Institute of Health Research grant to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. We also acknowledge sponsorship from several for-profit organisations for APCCC 2022, including Advanced Accelerator Applications, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer Health Care, Debiopharm, MSD, Janssen Oncology, Myovant Sciences, Orion Pharma, Pfizer Oncology, Roche, Telix Innovations SA, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Lantheus, and Tolmar. These for-profit organisations supported the conference financially but had no input on the scientific content or the final publication.Accepted versio

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Part I: intermediate-/high-risk and locally advanced disease, biochemical relapse, and side effects of hormonal treatment: report of the advanced prostate cancer consensus conference 2022

Background: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. Objective: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. Design, setting, and participants: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members (“panellists”) who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1–3. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. Results and limitations: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. Conclusions: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. Patient summary: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions

Telling Adolescents That a Parent Has Died

The aim of this study was to explicate ways in which parents tell their adolescents about a parent\u27s death. This study used a descriptive, qualitative design. From a large hospice in northeastern Ohio, nine adolescent children and six surviving spouses of recently deceased hospice patients were recruited. Participants completed a demographic questionnaire and a semistructured individual interview. Thematic content analysis techniques were used to analyze the data. Surviving parents tell adolescents about the parent\u27s death in ways that are intended to inform and ease the adolescents\u27 distress. They engage in the process of disclosure in one of three ways: measured telling, matter-of-fact telling, and inconsistent telling. Findings from the current study are consistent with the ways parents told their children about an ill parent\u27s life-threatening illness and imminent death. The findings support a framework that describes the processes of disclosure of a parent\u27s illness, imminent death, and death to their adolescent children. Predeath findings about telling foreshadowed the postdeath findings. These results can be used to inform the development of interventions in which nurses and other health care professionals assist families with disclosure before and after death by tailoring strategies according to the family\u27s communication style.</p

Changes in plasma biomarkers following treatment with cabozantinib in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer:a post hoc analysis of an extension cohort of a phase II trial

© 2016 Leibowitz-Amit et al. Background: Cabozantinib is an orally available inhibitor of tyrosine kinases including VEGFR2 and c-MET. We performed a post hoc analysis to find associations between select plasma biomarkers and treatment response in patients (pts) with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who received cabozantinib 100 mg daily as part of a phase 2 non-randomized expansion cohort (NCT00940225). Methods: Plasma samples were collected at baseline, 6 weeks and at time of maximal response from 81 mCRPC pts with bone metastases, of which 33 also had measurable soft-tissue disease. Levels of 27 biomarkers were measured in duplicate using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for the association between biomarker levels or their change on treatment and either bone scan response (BSR) or soft tissue response according to RECIST. Results: A BSR and RECIST response were seen in 66/81 pts (81 %) and 6/33 pts (18 %) respectively. No significant associations were found between any biomarker at any time point and either type of response. Plasma concentrations of VEGFA, FLT3L, c-MET, AXL, Gas6A, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, interleukin-8 and the hypoxia markers CA9 and clusterin significantly increased during treatment with cabozantinib irrespective of response. The plasma concentrations of VEGFR2, Trap5b, Angiopoietin-2, TIMP-2 and TIE-2 significantly decreased during treatment with caboznatinib. Conclusions: Our data did not reveal plasma biomarkers associated with response to cabozantinib. The observed alterations in several biomarkers during treatment with cabozantinib may provide insights on the effects of cabozantinib on tumor cells and on tumor micro-environment and may help point to potential co-targeting approaches