Search

Knowledge about molecular mechanisms driving development and progression of renal cell carcinoma has been elucidated by different studies. In few years we discovered a large difference between genomic landscapes of clear cell and non-clear cell carcinoma. Moreover, tumor heterogeneity and different acquisition of gene mutations during tumor progression are issues of particular interest. In this review we focalized our attention on principal genomic alterations identified among RCC subtypes. Acquired gene mutations may be an adaptive response to several external pressure including metabolic, treatment, genomic and immune-related external pressure. Thus we correlated and discussed principal genomic alterations adopted by tumor to escape from each external pressures. The aim of the present work is to summarize current knowledge about genomic alterations in RCC with special interest of treatment strategies tailored on the basis of disease mutations assessment., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Telomerase activity and telomere length are essential for the pathogenesis of several human diseases, including genitourinary tumors. Telomerase constitutes a complex system that includes human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT), human telomerase RNA component (hTR) and telomerase associated protein 1 (TEP1), which are overexpressed in tumor cells compared to normal cells and are involved in the carcinogenesis and progression of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), bladder (BC) and prostate cancer (PCa). In addition, telomerase degraded peptide fragments expressed on the surface of tumor cells lead to their recognition by immune cells. On this scenario, in vitro and in vivo studies have shown effective anti-tumor activity of hTERT-tailored strategies in genitourinary tumors, including active immunotherapy with hTERT-peptide vaccines and passive immunotherapy with hTERT-transduced T cell infusion. This review emphasizes the role of telomerase in the carcinogenesis and progression of genitourinary tumors, thus underlying the potential of emerging telomerase-tailored immunotherapies in these patients., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Socioeconomic status can potentially affect prognosis of cancer patients. Our aim was to describe potential differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment, and survival by education level in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) enrolled in clinical trials of first-line treatment., Methods: Individual data of Italian patients with advanced NSCLC (stage IV, or IIIB with supraclavicular nodes or malignant pleural effusion), ECOG performance status (PS) 0-2, enrolled in four phase III randomized trials conducted between 1996 and 2005 were pooled. Information about education was available for 1680 of 1709 patients (98.3%). Patients were divided in two groups according to education level: high (patients with at least high school diploma) or low (those with less than high school diploma). Survival analyses were stratified by treatment arm within trial., Results: There were 312 (19%) and 1368 (81%) patients with high and low education, respectively. Education level was significantly different among birth cohorts, with a time-trend toward higher education level. Patients with high education were significantly younger (median age 65 vs. 70), were less frequently unfit at diagnosis (ECOG PS2 5% vs. 16%), and their tumor type was more frequently adenocarcinoma (47% vs. 37%). Number of treatment cycles received was not significantly different between education groups. Median survival was 9.4 and 7.6 months in high and low education, respectively (p=0.012). At multivariable analysis, female sex, better PS and high education level (Hazard Ratio 0.85, 95%CI 0.73-0.99, p=0.03) were independently associated with longer survival., Conclusions: In Italian patients enrolled in four randomized trials of first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC, high education was significantly more frequent among younger patients, and was associated with lower proportion of PS2 patients. Education level did not significantly affect number of chemotherapy cycles received. Overall survival was longer in patients with high education, after adjustment for PS and other prognostic factors. The exact underlying mechanisms of the independent prognostic role of education level are substantially unknown, but lead-time bias (anticipation in diagnosis and time to inclusion in the trial), differences in adherence to care outside the trial procedures, differences in comorbidities and life-style factors may all contribute., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: More than 50% of brain metastases (BMs) occur in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Untreated patients with BMs have a poor prognosis with a median survival of 2 months. In most cases BMs are multiple and their optimal therapy is whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). The role of systemic therapies for these patients is still a matter for investigation due to concerns about the ability of these drugs to cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Cisplatin (CDDP) remains the backbone for medical treatment of NSCLC and fotemustine (FTM) is a nitrosurea able to cross the BBB., Methods: Patients with advanced NSCLC, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-1 and multiple BMs not amenable to surgery or stereotactic radiotherapy were treated with 2 cycles of FTM 80 mg/m(2) days 1, 8 and CDDP 80 mg/m(2) day 1, every 3 weeks followed by WBRT 30 Gy (3 Gy daily in 10 fractions). Radiological restaging was performed before WBRT to assess the role of chemotherapy both for cranial and extracranial disease. Patients with disease control (DC: complete response plus partial response) received 4 more cycles. To assess the basic activities of daily living (ADL), the Barthel ADL Index was used to score patients' performance every 2 cycles. The trial design provides a two-step evaluation according to the optimal two-stage design of Simon. In the first phase 29 patients were enrolled in order to verify if this schedule showed more than 25% response rate both for cranial and extracranial disease. If so, enrollment added up to a total of 81 patients., Results: After the first evaluation 4 out of 29 patients were excluded from the study (3 untreated/1 not included for administrative reasons). At the time of the planned interim analysis patient's characteristics were the following: median age 61 years (range 44-70), M/F = 16/9, adenocarcinoma 11, squamous 5, large cell 2, undefined NSCLC 7; PS 0/1 in 11/14 cases, median Barthel Index score was 20 [13-20]. Three (12%) partial responses were observed, 9 subjects (36%) with stable disease and 13 (52%) showing disease progression. These data did not satisfy the pre-planned hypothesis and the study was stopped. At the time of the first evaluation before WBRT 12/25 (48%) patients had a systemic DC in contrast with 15/25 (60%) patients with BMs DC. Chemotherapy was relatively well tolerated with a prevalence of asthenia as the most relevant specific toxicity while the haematological toxicity was mild., Conclusion: CDDP and FTM combined with WBRT do not represent a therapeutic option for patients with NSCLC. Therefore further studies to evaluate the combination of systemic treatments with WBRT are warranted., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Quality of life (QoL) has gained greater importance in the management of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer due to the palliative nature of treatment. Docetaxel (DCT) and cisplatin (CDDP) doublet has been reported to be associated to a better QoL than the weekly vinorelbine (VNR) and CDDP regimen. Recently a newer more tolerated schedule of the VNR/CDDP regimen has been published and is widely employed in medical practice. The impact of these regimens on patients' QoL as well as symptoms control and type and grading chemo-related side-effects has been compared prospectically., Methods: Patients received CDDP 75 mg/m(2) plus DCT 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 every weeks (arm A) or CDDP 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus VNR 30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm B). G-CSF and/or EPO were employed as needed. Health-related QoL was assessed at entry and after every cycle by the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and LC13 questionnaires, toxicity by the NCI-NCCN CTC vs 2, and intent-to-treat objective response by the Recist criteria., Results: The QoL questionnaires were completed by 37 pts (88%) in the DCT/CDDP arm and 39 pts (87%) in the VNR/CDDP one. Baseline mean scores and rates at which pts failed to complete QoL assessment were similar in the two arms. Global health status of the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale and specific symptoms control (LC13 module) improved during treatment without any statistically significant difference between the two arms. Emotional functioning remained stable in both groups during treatment, whereas physical and role improved slightly. In the DCT/CDDP arm 14 pts (33%; 95%CL 24-40%) had PR, and 10 (24%) SD for a 57% TGCR. In the VNR/CDDP arm 12 pts (27%) achieved PR, 18 (41%) SD a 68% TGCR. Differences were not statistically significant. Median time-to-progression was 4.2 months in the DCT/CDDP arm and 4.5 months in the VNR/CDDP one, and median overall survival was 12.1 (range 1-26+ months) and 12.5 months (range 1-28+ months) for DCT/CDDP and VNR/CDDP arms, respectively. Febrile neutropenia rate was higher in the VNR/CDDP arm (p=0.02) as well as G3-4 anemia (p=0.005) and G-CSF/EPO use (p=0.019)., Conclusions: Global and specific health-related QoL data similar in both treatment groups with no statistically significant difference. Efficacy measures, overall response rate, time-to-progression and overall survival were equivalent in both arms. However, severe anemia and febrile neutropenia are statistically more frequent in the VNR/CDDP arm than in the DCT/CDDP one. These data should be considered in treatment decision-making for pts with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and for the design of future trials with chemotherapy plus biologics., (Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Two parallel randomized phase 2 trials were performed to choose the optimal way of combining cetuximab with gemcitabine in the first-line treatment of elderly (CALC1-E) and adult PS2 (CALC1-PS2) patients with advanced NSCLC., Methods: Stage IV or IIIB NSCLC patients, aged > or =70 years with PS 0-2 for CALC1-E or aged <70 with PS2 for CALC1-PS2, not selected for EGFR expression, were eligible. Patients were randomized to concomitant (gemcitabine, for a maximum of 6 cycles, plus cetuximab until progression) or sequential (gemcitabine, for a maximum of 6 cycles, followed by cetuximab) strategy. A selection design, with 1-year survival rate as the primary endpoint, was applied, requiring 58 elderly and 42 PS2 patients., Results: All planned patients were randomized. In sequential arms, 34.5% and 60.0% patients were not able to receive cetuximab after gemcitabine in CALC1-E and CALC1-PS2, respectively. Survival rates (95% CI) at 1-year for concomitant and sequential arms were 41.4% (23.5-61.1) and 31.0% (15.3-50.8) in CALC1-E and 27.3% (10.7-50.2) and 35.0% (15.4-59.2) in CALC1-PS2. In both studies, survival curves crossed at about 10 months and the worse arm until that time became the better one at 1-year. Toxicity was similar across treatment groups. In concomitant arm of CALC1-E (but not of CALC1-PS2), survival was longer for patients who developed skin toxicity within the first two cycles of treatment., Conclusion: In both groups of patients, sequential strategy cannot be proposed for future trials because of low compliance. Inconsistency of survival outcomes makes also concomitant treatment not a candidate for further testing in unselected elderly and PS2 NSCLC patients.