PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-7 (7)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Year of Publication
1.  Expression of EPHRIN-A1, SCINDERIN and MHC class I molecules in head and neck cancers and relationship with the prognostic value of intratumoral CD8+ T cells 
BMC Cancer  2013;13:592.
Background
Our group has previously shown that EPHRIN-A1 and SCINDERIN expression by tumor cells rendered them resistant to cytotoxic T lymphocyte-mediated lysis. Whereas the prognostic value of EPHRIN-A1 expression in cancer has already been studied, the role of SCINDERIN presence remains to be established. In the present work, we investigated the prognosis value of EPHRIN-A1 and SCINDERIN expression in head and neck carcinomas. In addition, we monitored the HLA-class I expression by tumor cells and the presence of tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells to evaluate a putative correlation between these factors and the survival prognosis by themselves or related to EPHRIN-A1 and SCINDERIN expression.
Methods
Tumor tissue sections of 83 patients with head and neck cancer were assessed by immunohistochemistry for the expression of EPHRIN-A1, SCINDERIN, HLA class I molecules and the presence of CD8+ T cells.
Results
No significant prognosis value could be attributed to these factors independently, despite a tendency of association between EPHRIN-A1 and a worse clinical outcome. No prognostic value could be observed when CD8+ T cell tumor infiltration was analyzed combined with EPHRIN-A1, SCINDERIN or HLA class I expression.
Conclusion
These results highlight that molecules involved in cancer cell resistance to cytotoxic T lymphocytes by themselves are not a sufficient criteria for prognosis determination in cancer patients. Other intrinsic or tumor microenvironmental features should be considered in prognostic evaluation.
doi:10.1186/1471-2407-13-592
PMCID: PMC3867221  PMID: 24330498
2.  Neoadjuvant Dose-Dense Gemcitabine plus Docetaxel and Vinorelbine plus Epirubicin for Operable Breast Cancer 
Drugs in R&d  2012;11(2):147-157.
Background: Neoadjuvant anti-tumor activity of an alternating taxane- and anthracycline-based dose-dense regimen in patients with operable, noninflammatory large breast cancer was investigated.
Objective: The objective is to study the rate of pathological complete response in patients with breast cancer receiving dose-dense chemotherapy sequentially with gemcitabine plus docetaxel and vinorelbine plus epirubicin.
Methods: Women (n = 74) with clinical stage II or III breast cancer were enrolled in this open-label, multicenter study to receive six 2-weekly courses of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 plus docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 plus epirubicin 100mg/m2 on days 29 and 43. Patients with an objective response on day 56 then received another cycle of gemcitabine/ docetaxel on day 57 and of vinorelbine/epirubicin on day 71. Conservative surgery was scheduled for all patients.
Results: Of the patients enrolled, 30% had triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 22% overall, but was higher in TNBC than patients without TNBC (40.9% vs 14.0%; p=0.028). Among patients with a pCR, patients with TNBC had similar recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) to patients without TNBC. Among those without a pCR, RFS rates for patients with TNBC were significantly lower than for patients without TNBC (p=0.04). The most common severe hematologic toxicity was neutropenia.
Conclusions: Administering four drugs in a dose-dense alternating sequence gave a high pCR in patients with operable, invasive breast cancer. Patients with TNBC with a pCR had similar OS to patients without TNBC, whereas patients with TNBC without a pCR had poorer survival rate than their non- TNBC counterparts.
doi:10.2165/11591210-000000000-00000
PMCID: PMC3585987  PMID: 21679005
3.  Risk of Hormone Escape in a Human Prostate Cancer Model Depends on Therapy Modalities and Can Be Reduced by Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors 
PLoS ONE  2012;7(8):e42252.
Almost all prostate cancers respond to androgen deprivation treatment but many recur. We postulated that risk of hormone escape -frequency and delay- are influenced by hormone therapy modalities. More, hormone therapies induce crucial biological changes involving androgen receptors; some might be targets for escape prevention. We investigated the relationship between the androgen deprivation treatment and the risk of recurrence using nude mice bearing the high grade, hormone-dependent human prostate cancer xenograft PAC120. Tumor-bearing mice were treated by Luteinizing-Hormone Releasing Hormone (LHRH) antagonist alone, continuous or intermittent regimen, or combined with androgen receptor (AR) antagonists (bicalutamide or flutamide). Tumor growth was monitored. Biological changes were studied as for genomic alterations, AR mutations and protein expression in a large series of recurrent tumors according to hormone therapy modalities. Therapies targeting Her-2 or AKT were tested in combination with castration. All statistical tests were two-sided. Tumor growth was inhibited by continuous administration of the LH-RH antagonist degarelix (castration), but 40% of tumors recurred. Intermittent castration or complete blockade induced by degarelix and antiandrogens combination, inhibited tumor growth but increased the risk of recurrence (RR) as compared to continuous castration (RRintermittent: 14.5, RRcomplete blockade: 6.5 and 1.35). All recurrent tumors displayed new quantitative genetic alterations and AR mutations, whatever the treatment modalities. AR amplification was found after complete blockade. Increased expression of Her-2/neu with frequent ERK/AKT activation was detected in all variants. Combination of castration with a Her-2/neu inhibitor decreased recurrence risk (0.17) and combination with an mTOR inhibitor prevented it. Anti-hormone treatments influence risk of recurrence although tumor growth inhibition was initially similar. Recurrent tumors displayed genetic instability, AR mutations, and alterations of phosphorylation pathways. We postulated that Her-2/AKT pathways allowed salvage of tumor cells under castration and we demonstrated that their inhibition prevented tumor recurrence in our model.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042252
PMCID: PMC3412862  PMID: 22879924
4.  Renal malacoplakia: Case report of a differential diagnosis for renal cell carcinoma 
Summary
Background:
Renal malacoplakia is a very rare chronic inflammatory disorder characterized by specific infiltration of tissue by inflammatory cells, and presents similar radiological characteristics to those of renal cell carcinoma.
Case Report:
A 54-year old woman, with a 37-year history of smoking, weight loss, anorexia, asthenia, and night sweats, was included in an antiangiogenesis clinical trial. Clinical signs of inflammation were apparent in the right lumbar region without functional limitations. Previous imagery identified a mass infiltrating the lower pole of the right kidney, extending to the psoas, perinephretic region and ganglia. Biological testing revealed inflammation and a urinary tract infection, treated with ciprofloxacin. Based on histology of a renal puncture biopsy, clear cell carcinoma with oxyphilic cells was suspected but not confirmed by immunohistochemistry.
Urine analysis was positive for Escherichia Coli. Computed tomodensitometry revealed three masses (right kidney, between right psoas and the inferior vena cava, and right psoas) and a second puncture biopsy confirmed malacoplakia. After successful antibiotherapy, a right-sided nephrectomy was performed. The patient now shows no evidence of disease.
Conclusions:
This case underscores the importance of excluding the differential diagnosis of renal malacoplakia before undertaking partial or total nephrectomy and/or initiating neoadjuvant treatment for renal cell carcinoma.
doi:10.12659/AJCR.882596
PMCID: PMC3616183  PMID: 23569483
malacoplakia; kidney; diagnosis
5.  Antiangiogenic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma: Management of treatment-related toxicities 
Investigational New Drugs  2012;30(5):2066-2079.
Summary
Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved rapidly over the last two decades as major pathways involved in pathogenesis have been elucidated. These include the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) axis and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). Therapies targeting the VEGF pathway include bevacizumab, sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, and axitinib, whereas temsirolimus and everolimus inhibit the mTOR pathway. All of these novel therapies—VEGF and mTOR inhibitors—are associated with a variety of unique toxicities, some of which may necessitate expert medical management, treatment interruption, or dose reduction. Common adverse events with newer drugs include hypertension, skin reactions, gastrointestinal disturbances, thyroid dysfunction, and fatigue. Skilled management of these toxicities is vital to ensure optimal therapeutic dosing and maximize patient outcomes, including improved survival and quality of life. This review describes and compares the toxicity profiles of novel molecularly targeted agents used in the treatment of mRCC and presents guidance on how best to prevent and manage treatment-related toxicities. Particular attention is given to axitinib, the newest agent to enter the armamentarium. Axitinib is a second-generation receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor with potent VEGF receptor inhibition that provides durable responses and superior progression-free survival in advanced RCC compared with sorafenib.
doi:10.1007/s10637-012-9796-8
PMCID: PMC3432793  PMID: 22327313
Axitinib; Renal cell carcinoma; Tyrosine kinase inhibitor; Toxicity; Adverse events
6.  Overall Survival and Updated Results for Sunitinib Compared With Interferon Alfa in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma 
Journal of Clinical Oncology  2009;27(22):3584-3590.
Purpose
A randomized, phase III trial demonstrated superiority of sunitinib over interferon alfa (IFN-α) in progression-free survival (primary end point) as first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Final survival analyses and updated results are reported.
Patients and Methods
Seven hundred fifty treatment-naïve patients with metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily on a 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off dosing schedule or to IFN-α 9 MU subcutaneously thrice weekly. Overall survival was compared by two-sided log-rank and Wilcoxon tests. Progression-free survival, response, and safety end points were assessed with updated follow-up.
Results
Median overall survival was greater in the sunitinib group than in the IFN-α group (26.4 v 21.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.821; 95% CI, 0.673 to 1.001; P = .051) per the primary analysis of unstratified log-rank test (P = .013 per unstratified Wilcoxon test). By stratified log-rank test, the HR was 0.818 (95% CI, 0.669 to 0.999; P = .049). Within the IFN-α group, 33% of patients received sunitinib, and 32% received other vascular endothelial growth factor–signaling inhibitors after discontinuation from the trial. Median progression-free survival was 11 months for sunitinib compared with 5 months for IFN-α (P < .001). Objective response rate was 47% for sunitinib compared with 12% for IFN-α (P < .001). The most commonly reported sunitinib-related grade 3 adverse events included hypertension (12%), fatigue (11%), diarrhea (9%), and hand-foot syndrome (9%).
Conclusion
Sunitinib demonstrates longer overall survival compared with IFN-α plus improvement in response and progression-free survival in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC. The overall survival highlights an improved prognosis in patients with RCC in the era of targeted therapy.
doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.20.1293
PMCID: PMC3646307  PMID: 19487381
7.  Sorafenib for Older Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma: Subset Analysis From a Randomized Trial 
Background
The perception that older cancer patients may be at higher risk than younger patients of toxic effects from cancer therapy but may obtain less clinical benefit from it may be based on the underrepresentation of older patients in clinical trials and the known toxic effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy. It is not known how older patients respond to targeted therapy.
Methods
This retrospective subgroup analysis of data from the phase 3, randomized Treatment Approach in Renal Cancer Global Evaluation Trial examined the safety and efficacy of sorafenib in older (age ≥70 years, n = 115) and younger patients (age <70 years, n = 787) who received treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patient demographics and progression-free survival were recorded. Best tumor response, clinical benefit rate (defined as complete response plus partial response plus stable disease), time to self-reported health status deterioration, and toxic effects were assessed by descriptive statistics. Health-related quality of life was assessed with a Cox proportional hazards model. Kaplan–Meier analyses were used to summarize time-to-event data.
Results
Median progression-free survival was similar in sorafenib-treated younger patients (23.9 weeks; hazard ratio [HR] for progression compared with placebo = 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.47 to 0.66) and older patients (26.3 weeks; HR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.26 to 0.69). Clinical benefit rates among younger and older sorafenib-treated patients were also similar (83.5% and 84.3%, respectively) and were superior to those of younger and older placebo-treated patients (53.8% and 62.2%, respectively). Adverse events were predictable and manageable regardless of age. Sorafenib treatment delayed the time to self-reported health status deterioration among both older patients (121 days with sorafenib vs 85 days with placebo; HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.03) and younger patients (90 days with sorafenib vs 52 days with placebo; HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.81) and improved quality of life over that time.
Conclusions
Among patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving sorafenib treatment, outcomes of older (≥70 years) and younger (<70 years) patients were similar.
doi:10.1093/jnci/djn319
PMCID: PMC2567417  PMID: 18840822

Results 1-7 (7)