No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Everolimus is a valid therapeutic option for neuroendocrine tumors (NETs); however, data in a real-world setting outside regulatory trials are sparse. The aim of this study was to determine everolimus tolerability and efficacy, in relation to previous treatments, in a compassionate use program. A total of 169 patients with advanced progressive NETs treated with everolimus were enrolled, including 85 with pancreatic NETs (pNETs) and 84 with nonpancreatic NETs (non-pNETs). Previous treatments included somatostatin analogs (92.9%), peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT; 50.3%), chemotherapy (49.7%), and PRRT and chemotherapy (22.8%). Overall, 85.2% of patients experienced adverse events (AEs), which were severe (grade 3-4) in 46.1%. The most frequent severe AEs were pneumonitis (8.3%), thrombocytopenia (7.7%), anemia (5.3%), and renal failure (3.5%). In patients previously treated with PRRT andchemotherapy, a12-foldincreased riskforseveretoxicitywas observed, with grade 3-4 AEs reported in 86.8% (vs. 34.3% in other patients). In addition, 63.3% of patients required temporarily everolimus discontinuation due to toxicity. Overall, 27.8% of patients died during a median follow-up of 12 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 12 months and 32 months, respectively. Similar disease control rates, PFS,and OS werereported in pNETs and non-pNETs. In the real-world setting, everolimus is safe and effective for the treatment of NETs of different origins. Higher severe toxicity occurred in patients previously treated with systemic chemotherapy and PRRT. This finding prompts caution when using this drug in pretreated patients and raises the issue of planning for everolimus before PRRT and chemotherapy in the therapeutic algorithm for advanced NETs. The Oncologist 2014;19:966-974 Implications for Practice: Data reported outside regulatory trial settings are useful for physicians dealing with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and provide understanding of whether the findings obtained in those trials are consistent with clinical practice. In this real-world study of everolimus in advanced, progressive NETs, significantly higher severe toxicity was observed in patients with long-duration disease and in those previously treated with systemic chemotherapy and/or peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. These findings may help physicians to plan an optimal therapeutic strategy for these patients to avoid predictable severe toxicity that may also result in limitations for further treatments.

No abstract

The role of bridging therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on the waiting list for liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial. There is strong evidence to support the effectiveness of sorafenib in extending the time to progression of HCC. Using a Markov model, we compared two strategies: one using sorafenib as neoadjuvant therapy before LT (Strategy A), and the other using no bridging therapy in the first 6 months (Strategy B). Reference case: T2 HCC patient with compensated cirrhosis. The benefit of sorafenib in delaying time to HCC progression was expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) and taken from recently published randomized trials. The endpoints considered were: survival benefit measured in quality-adjusted life days (QALDs), transplant probability, costs (C) in €, willingness to pay (WTP), and net health benefit (NHB), where NHB ‫؍‬ survival benefit ؊ C/WTP. The calculated WTP of sorafenib in Italy was 346 € per QALD. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed a median survival benefit of 94 QALDs (10% percentile ‫؍‬ 38, 90% percentile ‫؍‬ 210). In the base-case scenario (HR ‫؍‬ 0.47, monthly dropout probability ‫؍‬ 5%, median time to LT ‫؍‬ 3 months), the gain in LT probability due to sorafenib was 5% and it increased proportionally with increasing median times to LT and decreasing HR. In the cost-benefit analysis, the incremental NHB of Strategy A versus Strategy B was 37 QALDs; it increased as sorafenib HR decreased and when median times to LT were shorter than 6 months, whereas for longer times it gradually dropped, particularly when Strategy B included effective locoregional treatments. Conclusion: Sorafenib neoadjuvant therapy is cost-effective by comparison with no therapy for T2-HCC patients waiting for LT, particularly for median times to LT under 6 months. (HEPATOLOGY 2010;51:165-173.)

No abstract