Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy is the recommended treatment, with the highest level of evidence, for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, only a minority of patients receive this treatment, mainly due to patient comorbidities, the relatively small survival benefit, and the lack of predictive biomarkers to select those patients most likely to benefit from this multimodal approach. In addition, adjuvant chemotherapy has been recommended for patients with high-risk MIBC, although randomized trials have not provided conclusive evidence on the impact of this approach. At present, however, this situation is changing, largely due to our improved knowledge of the molecular biology of bladder cancer, which has enabled us to identify new prognostic and predictive biomarkers that can be used to select the most appropriate treatment for each patient. Moreover, new active treatments, especially immunotherapy, have shown promising results in the neoadjuvant setting. In addition, the gene expression profile of bladder tumors can be used to classify them into different subtypes, which correlate with specific clinical-pathological characteristics and with treatment response or resistance. Therefore, the main objective for the near future is to introduce these translational breakthroughs into routine clinical practice in order to personalize treatment for each patient.
Management of low-grade gliomas (LGG) is based on clinical and radiologic features, including the Pignatti prognostic scoring system, which classifies patients as low- or high-risk. To determine whether molecular data can offer advantages over these features, we have examined the prognostic impact of several molecular alterations in LGG. In a cohort of 58 patients with LGG, we have retrospectively analyzed clinical and molecular characteristics, including the Pignatti criteria, IDH mutations, TP53 mutations, the 1p/19q deletion, and MGMT methylation, and correlated our findings with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Mean age of patients was 45 years; 71% were classified as low-risk by the Pignatti system. IDH mutations were detected in 62%, p53 mutations in 17%, the 1p/19q codeletion in 46%, and MGMT methylation in 40% of patients. Survival analyses were performed in the 49 patients without contrast enhancement. In the univariate analysis, IDH mutations, the 1p/19q codeletion, and the combination of IDH mutations with the 1p/19q codeletion were associated with both longer PFS (P = 0.006, P = 0.037, and P = 0.003, respectively) and longer OS (P < 0.001, P = 0.02, and P < 0.001, respectively). The multivariate analysis identified absence of IDH mutations as a factor for greater risk of progression [hazard ratio (HR) = 3.1; P = 0.007]and death (HR = 6.4; P < 0.001). We suggest that IDH mutations may be more effective than the Pignatti score in discriminating low- and high-risk patients with LGG.
BackgroundPazopanib is indicated in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). The aim of this study was to review the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of pazopanib and see how these aspects are linked to clinical practice.MethodsA non-exhaustive systematic review was conducted according to the three topics. No publication restrictions were imposed and the selected languages were Spanish and English. After that, a summary of the main results and findings of the review was presented and discussed during three meetings (one for each topic) with 13 medical oncologists that usually treat mRCC. At these meetings, a questionnaire on the first-line use of pazopanib in clinical practice was also drawn up. After the meetings, the questionnaire was completed by 60 specialist medical oncologists in renal cancer.ResultsThe efficacy and safety of pazopanib have been demonstrated in several clinical trials, and subsequently confirmed in studies in real-world clinical practice. In addition to its clinical benefit and good safety profile, quality of life results for pazopanib, which compare favorably to sunitinib, make it a good option in the first-line treatment of patients. Special populations have been included in studies conducted with pazopanib, and it is safe for use in elderly patients, poor functional status, kidney failure, and mild or moderate hepatic impairment, and in patients with concomitant cardiovascular disease. The results of the questionnaire have shown that pazopanib is perceived as an effective drug, in which quality of life (QoL) outcomes are valued above all.ConclusionsThis paper offers a comprehensive and critical summary of efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of pazopanib in the treatment of mRCC. Pazopanib is an effective treatment with an acceptable safety profile. Its QoL and tolerability results offer certain advantages when compared with other therapeutic alternatives, and its use appears to be safe in different patient profiles.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.