Relapsed and/or Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma: What Role for Temsirolimus?

Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) is associated with a dismal prognosis. Recently, along with the improved understanding of the pathophysiology of this disease, new first line regimens have been established and in addition novel treatment options have entered the clinical arena. In consequence, prognosis of the disease has fortunately improved. We here focus on the rationale, current clinical knowledge and future concepts of Temsirolimus, an inhibitor of mTOR, in the treatment of MCL. At this time this drug has been shown to be effective as single agent for relapsed disease and early combination data show promising results. In addition, with a brief outline of other treatment options, we aim to guide at which place in the current treatment algorithms Temsirolimus can be integrated into the treatment of MCL patients

Validation of the German Revised Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination for Detecting Mild Cognitive Impairment, Mild Dementia in Alzheimer's Disease and Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration

Background/Aims: The diagnostic accuracy of the German version of the revised Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-R) in identifying mild cognitive impairment (MCI), mild dementia in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild dementia in frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) in comparison with the conventional Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) was assessed. Methods: The study encompasses 76 cognitively healthy elderly individuals, 75 patients with MCI, 56 with AD and 22 with FTLD. ACE-R and MMSE were validated against an expert diagnosis based on a comprehensive diagnostic procedure. Statistical analysis was performed using the receiver operating characteristic method and regression analyses. Results: The optimal cut-off score for the ACE-R for detecting MCI, AD, and FTLD was 86/87, 82/83 and 83/84, respectively. ACE-R was superior to MMSE only in the detection of patients with FTLD {[}area under the curve (AUC): 0.97 vs. 0.92], whilst the accuracy of the two instruments did not differ in identifying MCI and AD. The ratio of the scores of the memory ACE-R subtest to verbal fluency subtest contributed significantly to the discrimination between AD and FTLD (optimal cut-off score: 2.30/2.31, AUC: 0.77), whereas the MMSE and ACE-R total scores did not. Conclusion: The German ACE-R is superior to the most commonly employed MMSE in detecting mild dementia in FTLD and in the differential diagnosis between AD and FTLD. Thus it might serve as a valuable instrument as part of a comprehensive diagnostic workup in specialist centres/clinics contributing to the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of the cause of dementia. Copyright (C) 2010 S. Karger AG, Base

Real-world Experience With Sunitinib Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Clinical Outcome According to Risk Score.

BACKGROUND: ADONIS is an ongoing observational study in 9 European countries, designed to evaluate treatment patterns/outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line sunitinib and/or second-line axitinib post sunitinib. We present an evaluation of sunitinib efficacy by risk group, in the real-world setting examined in ADONIS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled at the start of first-line sunitinib treatment or second-line axitinib post sunitinib treatment. Evaluation of sunitinib efficacy was assessed by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk criteria. RESULTS: For all patients in this analysis (N = 467), the median progression-free survival was 23.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.5-28.5 months), 11.8 months (95% CI, 8.1-17.4 months), and 4.6 months (95% CI, 2.5-7.7 months) for IMDC favorable-, intermediate-, and poor-risk groups, respectively. The median overall survival was 97.1 months (95% CI, 46.3 months-not evaluable [NE]), 33.5 months (95% CI, 20.5-46.6 months), and 10.0 months (95% CI, 4.5-19.8 months) for the respective risk groups. Data on individual risk factors were available for a subgroup of patients, allowing analysis by intermediate risk by 1 versus 2 risk factors. When including this subgroup (n = 120), the median overall survival for IMDC favorable-, intermediate-1, and intermediate-2 risk factors was 21.6 months (95% CI, 16.3 months-NE), 20.5 months (15.5 months-NE), and 15.1 months (4.1 months-NE), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For patients overall and by risk-group stratification, survival estimates were aligned with previously published data. In patients with intermediate-1 risk, overall survival was very similar to patients with favorable risk. However, further exploration of outcome data from different sources is needed to confirm these observations

ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline update on the use of immunotherapy in early stage and advanced renal cell carcinoma

Not availabl

Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

N

Safety and efficacy of advanced atrial pacing therapies for atrial tachyarrhythmias in patients with a new implantable dual chamber cardioverter-defibrillator

AbstractObjectivesThis study evaluated the safety and efficacy of atrial pacing therapies for the treatment and prevention of atrial tachycardia (AT) or atrial fibrillation (AF) in a new dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).BackgroundPatients with an ICD may also experience AT or AF that is amenable to pace termination.MethodsThe efficacy of atrial antitachycardia pacing (ATP) therapies for atrial tachycardia or atrial fibrillation (AT/AF) was determined in 151 patients after implantation of a GEM III AT ICD (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota). The percentage of episodes successfully terminated was adjusted for multiple episodes per patient.ResultsA total of 717 of 728 (96%) episodes classified as AT or AF were judged to be appropriate detections. By device classification, atrial ATP terminated 187 of 383 (40% adjusted) episodes classified as AT compared with 65 of 240 episodes classified as AF (26% adjusted, p = 0.013). Atrial Ramp or Burst+ ATP terminated 184 of 378 episodes of AT (39% adjusted), whereas 50-Hz Burst pacing therapy terminated only 12 of 109 episodes of AT (12% adjusted) and 65 of 240 episodes of AF (26% adjusted). If efficacy was defined as termination of AT/AF within 20 s of delivery of the pacing therapy, ATP therapies terminated 139 of 383 (32% adjusted) episodes of AT compared with 34 of 240 episodes of AF (15% adjusted, p = 0.003). Efficacy was dependent on AT cycle length. Frequent transitions between AT and AF predicted inefficacy of atrial ATP (p < 0.001). Ventricular proarrhythmia secondary to atrial ATP was not observed.ConclusionsAtrial ATP therapies terminate many episodes of AT without ventricular proarrhythmia. The addition of 50-Hz Burst pacing has minimal efficacy for AT/AF

Randomized, double blind study of non-excitatory, cardiac contractility modulation electrical impulses fr symptomatic heart failure

AIMS: We performed a randomized, double blind, crossover study of cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) signals in heart failure patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four subjects with ejection fraction (EF) < 35% and NYHA Class II (24%) or III (76%) symptoms received a CCM pulse generator. Patients were randomly assigned to Group 1 (n = 80, CCM treatment 3 months, sham treatment second 3 months) or Group 2 (n = 84, sham treatment 3 months, CCM treatment second 3 months). The co-primary endpoints were changes in peak oxygen consumption (VO2,peak) and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLWHFQ). Baseline EF (29.3 +/- 6.7% vs. 29.8 +/- 7.8%), VO2,peak (14.1 +/- 3.0 vs. 13.6 +/- 2.7 mL/kg/min), and MLWHFQ (38.9 +/- 27.4 vs. 36.5 +/- 27.1) were similar between the groups. VO2,peak increased similarly in both groups during the first 3 months (0.40 +/- 3.0 vs. 0.37 +/- 3.3 mL/kg/min, placebo effect). During the next 3 months, VO2,peak decreased in the group switched to sham (-0.86 +/- 3.06 mL/kg/min) and increased in patients switched to active treatment (0.16 +/- 2.50 mL/kg/min). MLWHFQ trended better with treatment (-12.06 +/- 15.33 vs. -9.70 +/- 16.71) during the first 3 months, increased during the second 3 months in the group switched to sham (+4.70 +/- 16.57), and decreased further in patients switched to active treatment (-0.70 +/- 15.13). A comparison of values at the end of active treatment periods vs. end of sham treatment periods indicates statistically significantly improved VO2,peak and MLWHFQ (P = 0.03 for each parameter). CONCLUSION: In patients with heart failure and left ventricular dysfunction, CCM signals appear safe; exercise tolerance and quality of life (MLWHFQ) were significantly better while patients were receiving active treatment with CCM for a 3-month period

First-line treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a decision-making analysis among experts

Background: The treatment landscape of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) has been transformed by targeted therapies with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and more recently by the incorporation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Today, a spectrum of single agent TKI to TKI/ICI and ICI/ICI combinations can be considered and the choice of the best regimen is complex. Materials and methods: We performed an updated decision-making analysis among 11 international kidney cancer experts. Each expert provided their treatment strategy and relevant decision criteria in the first line treatment of mccRCC. After the collection of all input a list of unified decision criteria was determined and compatible decision trees were created. We used a methodology based on diagnostic nodes, which allows for an automated cross-comparison of decision trees, to determine the most common treatment recommendations as well as deviations. Results: Diverse parameters were considered relevant for treatment selection, various drugs and drug combinations were recommended by the experts. The parameters, chosen by the experts, were performance status, International Metastatic renal cell carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk group, PD-L1 status, zugzwang and contraindication to immunotherapy. The systemic therapies selected for first line treatment were sunitinib, pazopanib, tivozanib, cabozantinib, ipilimumab/nivolumab or pembrolizumab/axitinib. Conclusion: A wide spectrum of treatment recommendations based on multiple decision criteria was demonstrated. Significant inter-expert variations were observed. This demonstrates how data from randomized trials are implemented differently when transferred into daily practice

How clinical practice is changing the rules: the sunitinib 2/1 schedule in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Introduction Currently, sunitinib is a standard of care in first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, with the standard 4/2 schedule (sunitinib 50 mg/day; 4 consecutive weeks on treatment; 2 weeks' rest), 50% of patients require dose reductions to mitigate toxicity, highlighting the need to investigate alternative dosing schedules that improve tolerability without compromising efficacy. Areas covered: We present a concise critical review of published studies comparing the efficacy and safety of the 4/2 and 2/1 schedule (2 weeks on treatment; 1 week rest) for sunitinib. While all studies evaluating the 2/1 schedule have a low level of evidence, the results indicate that the 2/1 schedule improves tolerability compared with the 4/2 schedule, including significant reductions in the incidence of specific adverse events. It was not possible to make any definitive conclusions regarding efficacy due to methodologic limitations of these studies. Expert commentary: In the absence of strong evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of the 2/1 schedule, we recommend that patients should be initiated on sunitinib therapy with the standard 4/2 schedule and only be switched to the 2/1 schedule after the development of dose-limiting toxicities from weeks 3-4 (cycle 1) of the 4/2 schedule cycle

Renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) denotes cancer originated from the renal epithelium and accounts for >90% of cancers in the kidney. The disease encompasses >10 histological and molecular subtypes, of which clear cell RCC (ccRCC) is most common and accounts for most cancer-related deaths. Although somatic VHL mutations have been described for some time, more-recent cancer genomic studies have identified mutations in epigenetic regulatory genes and demonstrated marked intra-tumour heterogeneity, which could have prognostic, predictive and therapeutic relevance. Localized RCC can be successfully managed with surgery, whereas metastatic RCC is refractory to conventional chemotherapy. However, over the past decade, marked advances in the treatment of metastatic RCC have been made, with targeted agents including sorafenib, sunitinib, bevacizumab, pazopanib and axitinib, which inhibit vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptor (VEGFR), and everolimus and temsirolimus, which inhibit mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), being approved. Since 2015, agents with additional targets aside from VEGFR have been approved, such as cabozantinib and lenvatinib; immunotherapies, such as nivolumab, have also been added to the armamentarium for metastatic RCC. Here, we provide an overview of the biology of RCC, with a focus on ccRCC, as well as updates to complement the current clinical guidelines and an outline of potential future directions for RCC research and therapy