| 1. |
- Aapro, M, et al.
(author)
-
Guidance on the use of bisphosphonates in solid tumours: recommendations of an international expert panel
- 2008
-
In: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041 .- 0923-7534. ; 19:3, s. 420-432
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Bisphosphonates (BP) prevent, reduce, and delay cancer-related skeletal complications in patients, and have substantially decreased the prevalence of such events since their introduction. Today, a broad range of BP with differences in potency, efficacy, dosing, and administration as well as approved indications is available. In addition, results of clinical trials investigating the efficacy of BP in cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) have been recently published. The purpose of this paper is to review the current evidence on the use of BP in solid tumours and provide clinical recommendations. An interdisciplinary expert panel of clinical oncologists and of specialists in metabolic bone diseases assessed the widespread evidence and information on the efficacy of BP in the metastatic and nonmetastatic setting, as well as ongoing research on the adjuvant use of BP. Based on available evidence, the panel recommends amino-bisphosphonates for patients with metastatic bone disease from breast cancer and zoledronic acid for patients with other solid tumours as primary disease. Dosing of BP should follow approved indications with adjustments if necessary. While i.v. administration is most often preferable, oral administration (clodronate, IBA) may be considered for breast cancer patients who cannot or do not need to attend regular hospital care. Early-stage cancer patients at risk of developing CTIBL should be considered for preventative BP treatment. The strongest evidence in this setting is now available for ZOL. Overall, BP are well-tolerated, and most common adverse events are influenza-like syndrome, arthralgia, and when used orally, gastrointestinal symptoms. The dose of BP may need to be adapted to renal function and initial creatinine clearance calculation is mandatory according to the panel for use of any BP. Subsequent monitoring is recommended for ZOL and PAM, as described by the regulatory authority guidelines. Patients scheduled to receive BP (mainly every 3-4 weeks i.v.) should have a dental examination and be advised on appropriate measures for reducing the risk of jaw osteonecrosis. BP are well established as supportive therapy to reduce the frequency and severity of skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from different cancers.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Andersson, J., et al.
(author)
-
Worse survival for TP53 (p53)-mutated breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant CMF
- 2005
-
In: Ann Oncol. - : Elsevier BV. - 0923-7534 .- 1569-8041. ; 16:5, s. 743-8
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: TP53 has been described as a prognostic factor in many malignancies, including breast cancer. Whether it also might be a predictive factor with reference to chemo- and endocrine therapy is more controversial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We investigated relapse-free (RFS), breast cancer-corrected (BCCS) and overall survival (OS) related to TP53 status in node-positive breast cancer patients that had received polychemotherapy [cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF)] and/or endocrine therapy (tamoxifen). Sequence analyses of the whole TP53 coding region was performed in 376 patients operated on for primary breast cancer with axillary lymph node metastases between 1984 and 1989 (median follow-up time 84 months). RESULTS: TP53 mutations were found in 105 patients (28%). We found 90 (82%) of the 110 mutations in the more frequently analysed exons 5-8, while the other 20 (18%) were located in exons 3-4 and 9-10, respectively. Univariate analyses showed TP53 to be a significant prognostic factor with regard to RFS, BCCS and OS in patients who received adjuvant CMF. CONCLUSIONS: TP53 mutations might induce resistance to certain modalities of breast cancer therapy. Sequence-determined TP53 mutation was of negative prognostic value in the total patient population and in the CMF treated patients.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Bajetta, E, et al.
(author)
-
National integration of European standards
- 2007
-
In: Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0923-7534. ; 18:6, s. 969-970
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)
|
|
| 10. |
- Barkholt, L., et al.
(author)
-
Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for metastatic renal carcinoma in Europe
- 2006
-
In: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041 .- 0923-7534. ; 17:7, s. 1134-1140
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: An allogeneic antitumour effect has been reported for various cancers. We evaluated the experience of allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in 124 patients from 21 European centres. Patients and methods: Reduced intensity conditioning and peripheral blood stem cells from an HLA-identical sibling (n = 106), a mismatched related (n = 5), or an unrelated (n = 13) donor were used. Immunosuppression was cyclosporine alone, or combined with methotrexate or mycophenolate mofetil. Donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI) were given to 42 patients. The median follow-up was 15 (range 3-41) months. Results: All but three patients engrafted. The cumulative incidence of moderate to severe, grades II-IV acute GVHD was 40% and for chronic GVHD it was 33%. Transplant-related mortality was 16% at one year. Complete (n = 4) or partial (n = 24) responses, median 150 (range 42-600) days post-transplant, were associated with time from diagnosis to HSCT, mismatched donor and acute GVHD II-IV. Factors associated with survival included chronic GVHD (hazards ratio, HR 4.12, P < 0.001), DLI (HR 3.39, P < 0.001), < 3 metastatic sites (HR 2.61, P = 0.002) and a Karnofsky score > 70 (HR 2.33, P = 0.03). Patients (n = 17) with chronic GVHD and given DLI had a 2-year survival of 70%. Conclusion: Patients with metastatic RCC, less than three metastatic locations and a Karnofsky score > 70% can be considered for HSCT. Posttransplant DLI and limited chronic GVHD improved the patient survival.
|
|
