To provide guidance regarding best practices in the prevention and management of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in patients with cancer.
Multinational Association of Supportive ...Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. Guideline development involved a systematic review of the literature and a formal consensus process. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies of the prevention and management of MRONJ related to bone-modifying agents (BMAs) for oncologic indications published between January 2009 and December 2017. Results from an earlier systematic review (2003 to 2008) were also included.
The systematic review identified 132 publications, only 10 of which were randomized controlled trials. Recommendations underwent two rounds of consensus voting.
Currently, MRONJ is defined by (1) current or previous treatment with a BMA or angiogenic inhibitor, (2) exposed bone or bone that can be probed through an intraoral or extraoral fistula in the maxillofacial region and that has persisted for longer than 8 weeks, and (3) no history of radiation therapy to the jaws or metastatic disease to the jaws. In patients who initiate a BMA, preventive care includes comprehensive dental assessments, discussion of modifiable risk factors, and avoidance of elective dentoalveolar surgery (ie, surgery that involves the teeth or contiguous alveolar bone) during BMA treatment. It remains uncertain whether BMAs should be discontinued before dentoalveolar surgery. Staging of MRONJ should be performed by a clinician with experience in the management of MRONJ. Conservative measures comprise the initial approach to MRONJ treatment. Ongoing collaboration among the dentist, dental specialist, and oncologist is essential to optimal patient care.
Purpose To make recommendations regarding the use of bisphosphonates and other bone-modifying agents as adjuvant therapy for patients with breast cancer. Methods Cancer Care Ontario and ASCO convened ...a Working Group and Expert Panel to develop evidence-based recommendations informed by a systematic review of the literature. Results Adjuvant bisphosphonates were found to reduce bone recurrence and improve survival in postmenopausal patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer. In this guideline, postmenopausal includes patients with natural menopause or that induced by ovarian suppression or ablation. Absolute benefit is greater in patients who are at higher risk of recurrence, and almost all trials were conducted in patients who also received systemic therapy. Most studies evaluated zoledronic acid or clodronate, and data are extremely limited for other bisphosphonates. While denosumab was found to reduce fractures, long-term survival data are still required. Recommendations It is recommended that, if available, zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 6 months) or clodronate (1,600 mg/d orally) be considered as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal patients with breast cancer who are deemed candidates for adjuvant systemic therapy. Further research comparing different bone-modifying agents, doses, dosing intervals, and durations is required. Risk factors for osteonecrosis of the jaw and renal impairment should be assessed, and any pending dental or oral health problems should be dealt with prior to starting treatment. Data for adjuvant denosumab look promising but are currently insufficient to make any recommendation. Use of these agents to reduce fragility fractures in patients with low bone mineral density is beyond the scope of the guideline. Recommendations are not meant to restrict such use of bone-modifying agents in these situations. Additional information at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-adjuvant-bisphosphonates-guideline , www.asco.org/guidelineswiki , https://www.cancercareontario.ca/guidelines-advice/types-of-cancer/breast .
Purpose This focused update addresses the use of MammaPrint (Agendia, Irvine, CA) to guide decisions on the use of adjuvant systemic therapy. Methods ASCO uses a signals approach to facilitate ...guideline updates. For this focused update, the publication of the phase III randomized MINDACT (Microarray in Node-Negative and 1 to 3 Positive Lymph Node Disease May Avoid Chemotherapy) study to evaluate the MammaPrint assay in 6,693 women with early-stage breast cancer provided a signal. An expert panel reviewed the results of the MINDACT study along with other published literature on the MammaPrint assay to assess for evidence of clinical utility. Recommendations If a patient has hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, node-negative breast cancer, the MammaPrint assay may be used in those with high clinical risk to inform decisions on withholding adjuvant systemic chemotherapy due to its ability to identify a good-prognosis population with potentially limited chemotherapy benefit. Women in the low clinical risk category did not benefit from chemotherapy regardless of genomic MammaPrint risk group. Therefore, the MammaPrint assay does not have clinical utility in such patients. If a patient has hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive breast cancer, the MammaPrint assay may be used in patients with one to three positive nodes and a high clinical risk to inform decisions on withholding adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. However, such patients should be informed that a benefit from chemotherapy cannot be excluded, particularly in patients with greater than one involved lymph node. The clinician should not use the MammaPrint assay to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive breast cancer at low clinical risk, nor any patient with HER2-positive or triple-negative breast cancer, because of the lack of definitive data in these populations. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .
Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women, and over two-thirds of cases express estrogen receptor-α (ER-α, encoded by ESR1). Through a prospective clinical sequencing program for advanced ...cancers, we enrolled 11 patients with ER-positive metastatic breast cancer. Whole-exome and transcriptome analysis showed that six cases harbored mutations of ESR1 affecting its ligand-binding domain (LBD), all of whom had been treated with anti-estrogens and estrogen deprivation therapies. A survey of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) identified four endometrial cancers with similar mutations of ESR1. The five new LBD-localized ESR1 mutations identified here (encoding p.Leu536Gln, p.Tyr537Ser, p.Tyr537Cys, p.Tyr537Asn and p.Asp538Gly) were shown to result in constitutive activity and continued responsiveness to anti-estrogen therapies in vitro. Taken together, these studies suggest that activating mutations in ESR1 are a key mechanism in acquired endocrine resistance in breast cancer therapy.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IJS, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Paclitaxel exposure, specifically the maximum concentration (
) and amount of time the concentration remains above 0.05 μmol/L (
), has been associated with the occurrence of paclitaxel-induced ...peripheral neuropathy. The objective of this study was to validate the relationship between paclitaxel exposure and peripheral neuropathy.
Patients with breast cancer receiving paclitaxel 80 mg/m
× 12 weekly doses were enrolled in an observational clinical study (NCT02338115). Paclitaxel plasma concentration was measured at the end of and 16-26 hours after the first infusion to estimate
and
Patient-reported peripheral neuropathy was collected via CIPN20 at each dose, and an 8-item sensory subscale (CIPN8) was used in the primary analysis to test for an association with
Secondary analyses were conducted using
as an alternative exposure parameter and testing each parameter with a secondary endpoint of the occurrence of peripheral neuropathy-induced treatment disruption.
In 60 subjects included in the analysis, the increase in CIPN8 during treatment was associated with baseline CIPN8, cumulative dose, and relative dose intensity (
< 0.05), but neither
(
= 0.27) nor
(
= 0.99). In analyses of the secondary endpoint, cumulative dose (OR = 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.18-1.80;
= 0.0008) and
(OR = 1.79; 95% CI, 1.06-3.01;
= 0.029) or
(OR = 2.74; 95% CI, 1.45-5.20;
= 0.002) were associated with peripheral neuropathy-induced treatment disruption.
Paclitaxel exposure is predictive of the occurrence of treatment-limiting peripheral neuropathy in patients receiving weekly paclitaxel for breast cancer. Studies are warranted to determine whether exposure-guided dosing enhances treatment effectiveness and/or prevents peripheral neuropathy in these patients.
.
Abstract
Background
Hypercalcemia of malignancy (HCM) is the most common metabolic complication of malignancies, but its incidence may be declining due to potent chemotherapeutic agents. The high ...mortality associated with HCM has declined markedly due to the introduction of increasingly effective chemotherapeutic drugs. Despite the widespread availability of efficacious medications to treat HCM, evidence-based recommendations to manage this debilitating condition are lacking.
Objective
To develop guidelines for the treatment of adults with HCM.
Methods
A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, together with experts in systematic literature review, identified and prioritized 8 clinical questions related to the treatment of HCM in adult patients. The systematic reviews (SRs) queried electronic databases for studies relevant to the selected questions. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. An independent SR was conducted in parallel to assess patients' and physicians' values and preferences, costs, resources needed, acceptability, feasibility, equity, and other domains relevant to the Evidence-to-Decision framework as well as to enable judgements and recommendations.
Results
The panel recommends (strong recommendation) in adults with HCM treatment with denosumab (Dmab) or an intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate (BP). The following recommendations were based on low certainty of the evidence. The panel suggests (conditional recommendation) (1) in adults with HCM, the use of Dmab rather than an IV BP; (2) in adults with severe HCM, a combination of calcitonin and an IV BP or Dmab therapy as initial treatment; and (3) in adults with refractory/recurrent HCM despite treatment with BP, the use of Dmab. The panel suggests (conditional recommendation) the addition of an IV BP or Dmab in adult patients with hypercalcemia due to tumors associated with high calcitriol levels who are already receiving glucocorticoid therapy but continue to have severe or symptomatic HCM. The panel suggests (conditional recommendation) in adult patients with hypercalcemia due to parathyroid carcinoma, treatment with either a calcimimetic or an antiresorptive (IV BP or Dmab). The panel judges the treatments as probably accessible and feasible for most recommendations but noted variability in costs, resources required, and their impact on equity.
Conclusions
The panel's recommendations are based on currently available evidence considering the most important outcomes in HCM to patients and key stakeholders. Treatment of the primary malignancy is instrumental for controlling hypercalcemia and preventing its recurrence. The recommendations provide a framework for the medical management of adults with HCM and incorporate important decisional and contextual factors. The guidelines underscore current knowledge gaps that can be used to establish future research agendas.
Evidence-based treatments for metastatic, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer to the CNS are limited. We previously reported modest activity of neratinib ...monotherapy for HER2-positive breast cancer brain metastases. Here we report the results from additional study cohorts.
Patients with measurable, progressive, HER2-positive brain metastases (92% after receiving CNS surgery and/or radiotherapy) received neratinib 240 mg orally once per day plus capecitabine 750 mg/m
twice per day for 14 days, then 7 days off. Lapatinib-naïve (cohort 3A) and lapatinib-treated (cohort 3B) patients were enrolled. If nine or more of 35 (cohort 3A) or three or more of 25 (cohort 3B) had CNS objective response rates (ORR), the drug combination would be deemed promising. The primary end point was composite CNS ORR in each cohort separately, requiring a reduction of 50% or more in the sum of target CNS lesion volumes without progression of nontarget lesions, new lesions, escalating steroids, progressive neurologic signs or symptoms, or non-CNS progression.
Forty-nine patients enrolled in cohorts 3A (n = 37) and 3B (n = 12; cohort closed for slow accrual). In cohort 3A, the composite CNS ORR = 49% (95% CI, 32% to 66%), and the CNS ORR in cohort 3B = 33% (95% CI, 10% to 65%). Median progression-free survival was 5.5 and 3.1 months in cohorts 3A and 3B, respectively; median survival was 13.3 and 15.1 months. Diarrhea was the most common grade 3 toxicity (29% in cohorts 3A and 3B).
Neratinib plus capecitabine is active against refractory, HER2-positive breast cancer brain metastases, adding additional evidence that the efficacy of HER2-directed therapy in the brain is enhanced by chemotherapy. For optimal tolerance, efforts to minimize diarrhea are warranted.
ONJ has been increasingly suspected to be a potential complication of bisphosphonate therapy in recent years. Thus, the ASBMR leadership appointed a multidisciplinary task force to address key ...questions related to case definition, epidemiology, risk factors, diagnostic imaging, clinical management, and future areas for research related to the disorder. This report summarizes the findings and recommendations of the task force.
Introduction: The increasing recognition that use of bisphosphonates may be associated with osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) led the leadership of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) to appoint a task force to address a number of key questions related to this disorder.
Materials and Methods: A multidisciplinary expert group reviewed all pertinent published data on bisphosphonate‐associated ONJ. Food and Drug Administration drug adverse event reports were also reviewed.
Results and Conclusions: A case definition was developed so that subsequent studies could report on the same condition. The task force defined ONJ as the presence of exposed bone in the maxillofacial region that did not heal within 8 wk after identification by a health care provider. Based on review of both published and unpublished data, the risk of ONJ associated with oral bisphosphonate therapy for osteoporosis seems to be low, estimated between 1 in 10,000 and <1 in 100,000 patient‐treatment years. However, the task force recognized that information on incidence of ONJ is rapidly evolving and that the true incidence may be higher. The risk of ONJ in patients with cancer treated with high doses of intravenous bisphosphonates is clearly higher, in the range of 1–10 per 100 patients (depending on duration of therapy). In the future, improved diagnostic imaging modalities, such as optical coherence tomography or MRI combined with contrast agents and the manipulation of image planes, may identify patients at preclinical or early stages of the disease. Management is largely supportive. A research agenda aimed at filling the considerable gaps in knowledge regarding this disorder was also outlined.
To update the recommendations on the role of bone-modifying agents in the prevention and treatment of skeletal-related events (SREs) for patients with metastatic breast cancer with bone metastases.
A ...literature search using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library identified relevant studies published between January 2003 and November 2010. The primary outcomes of interest were SREs and time to SRE. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and pain. An Update Committee reviewed the literature and re-evaluated previous recommendations.
Recommendations were modified to include a new agent. A recommendation regarding osteonecrosis of the jaw was added.
Bone-modifying agent therapy is only recommended for patients with breast cancer with evidence of bone metastases; denosumab 120 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks, intravenous pamidronate 90 mg over no less than 2 hours, or zoledronic acid 4 mg over no less than 15 minutes every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended. There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate greater efficacy of one bone-modifying agent over another. In patients with a calculated serum creatinine clearance of more than 60 mg/min, no change in dosage, infusion time, or interval of bisphosphonate administration is required. Serum creatinine should be monitored before each dose. All patients should receive a dental examination and appropriate preventive dentistry before bone-modifying agent therapy and maintain optimal oral health. Current standards of care for cancer bone pain management should be applied at the onset of pain, in concert with the initiation of bone-modifying agent therapy. The use of biochemical markers to monitor bone-modifying agent use is not recommended.
To update recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario CCO) adjuvant bone-modifying agents in breast cancer guideline.
An Expert Panel ...conducted a systematic review to identify new, potentially practice-changing data.
Four articles met eligibility criteria and form the evidentiary basis for revision of the previous recommendations.
Adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy should be discussed with all postmenopausal patients (natural or therapy-induced) with primary breast cancer, irrespective of hormone receptor status and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, who are candidates to receive adjuvant systemic therapy. Adjuvant bisphosphonates, if used, are not substitutes for standard anticancer modalities. The benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy will vary depending on the underlying risk of recurrence and is associated with a modest improvement in overall survival. The NHS PREDICT tool provides estimates of the benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy and may aid in decision making. Factors influencing the decision to recommend adjuvant bisphosphonate use should include patients' risk of recurrence, risk of side effects, financial toxicity, drug availability, patient preferences, comorbidities, and life expectancy. When an adjuvant bisphosphonate is used to prevent breast cancer recurrence, the therapeutic options recommended by the Panel include oral clodronate, oral ibandronate, and intravenous zoledronic acid. The Panel supports starting bisphosphonate therapy early, consistent with the points outlined in the parent CCO-ASCO guideline; this is a consensus recommendation. The Panel does not recommend adjuvant denosumab to prevent breast cancer recurrence, because studies did not show a consistent reduction of breast cancer recurrence in any subset of those with early-stage breast cancer.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guideline.
PDF
