Introduction. The presence of a germinal BRCA mutation occurs in 3–4% of all breast cancer (BC) patients with various biological subtypes, but significantly with a high frequency in patients with a triple negative biological subtype (in 10–20% of cases). For the treatment of patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer associated with gBRCA mutation, the effectiveness of biologically targeted drugs from the group of PARP inhibitors (olaparib and talazoparib) has been proven.Purpose. Comparison of the results of our experience with the use of talazoparib in patients with HER2-gBRCA+ + mBC with the data of the EMBRACA registration study.Materials and methods. As part of the multicenter compassionate use program (CUP) with the support of Pfizer, 24 patients with HER2-negative metastatic gBRCA-associated mutation metastatic breast cancer (HER2-gBRCA+ breast cancer) received biologically targeted therapy with the PARP inhibitor talazoparib at a standard oral dose of 1 mg per day for vital indications . The average age of patients with HER2-gBRCAm+ breast cancer was 50 years (29–90 years).Results. Objective response (OR) was registered in 29% of cases, disease control (OR+stabilization) – in 71% of cases. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.5 months (95% CI [3–10]). Objective response, disease control, and median PFS were evaluated depending on the biological subtype, the number of lines of previous therapy, and the presence of platinum-containing agents in the anamnesis.Objective response and disease control were evaluated depending on the biological subtype: in patients with ER+HER2-mBC versus patients with triple negative subtype, OR was 33% vs 22%, and disease control was 83% vs 61%, respectively. In the presence of < 3 vs ≥ 3 lines of therapy for metastatic disease in the anamnesis, OR was 31% vs 12.5%, disease control – 75% vs 50% of cases, respectively. In the presence or absence of platinum-containing agents in the anamnesis, OR was observed in 22% vs 33% of cases, and disease control – 67% vs 67%, respectively.In patients with the luminal subtype versus patients with the triple negative subtype, the PFS was 9 months vs 5 months, respectively (HR = 0.705; 95% CI [0.231–2.147]; p = 0.5208). Median PFS in the presence of <3 vs ≥3 lines of therapy for metastatic disease in the anamnesis was 9 months vs 4 months, respectively (HR = 4,216; 95% CI [1,334–13,327]; p = 0.0056). In the presence or absence of platinum-containing agents in previous lines of therapy 5 months vs 9.5 months, respectively (HR =1.484; 95% CI [0.48–4.582]; p = 0.4750).During the treatment with talazoparib adverse events of the 3rd-4th grades were observed in 5 patients (20,8%). These include moderate and severe anemia in 3 patients (12.5%), thrombocytopenia in 1 patient (4%), and neutropenia in 1 patient (4%). The majority of patients (79,5%), which received talazoparib, did not require dose adjustment. The need to reduce the dose to 0.75 mg was noted in 3 patients (12.5%), to 0.5 mg – in 2 patients (8%). Hemotransfusion was performed in 3 patients. For effective therapy safety management regular monitoring of blood parameters is necessary.Conclusion. Thus, targeted therapy with talazoparib is an effective treatment option for HER2-gBRCA+ mBC.

Anaplastic thyroid cancer is one of the most aggressive and fatal human carcinomas. A significant experience in using various kinase inhibitors for anaplastic thyroid cancer therapy has been accumulated worldwide. The most encouraging results were obtained after using a combination of b-Raf and MEK kinase inhibitors (vemurafenib/dabrafenib and trametinib/cobimetinib, respectively) for the treatment of the unresectable BRAFV600E-positive anaplastic thyroid cancer. This drug combination makes it possible to perform surgery followed by chemoradiotherapy and other targeted therapies. Here we report a clinical case of anaplastic thyroid cancer in a 69-year-old woman, who was treated with neoadjuvant targeted therapy. The treatment was carried out on the basis of three medical institutions: the National Medical Research Radiological Centre (Moscow), the N.I. Pirogov Clinic of Advanced Medical Technologies (St. Petersburg) and the Endocrinology Research Center (Moscow). Since there is still no universal protocol for treating ATC patients, and only palliative therapy is used in most cases, we emphasized on diagnostic and treatment errors of this disease. Special attention was paid to the importance of using molecular diagnostics and modern medical imaging technologies.

Background. The approach to the management of prostate cancer with lymph node metastases has recently moved towards aggressive multimodal treatment with the use of the most rational combinations that are currently available.Objective: to assess the efficacy and tolerability of chemohormonal therapy (CHT) in patients with high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer.Materials and methods. An open prospective clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of neoadjuvant and adjuvant CHT in patients with high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer was initiated in 2016 at the P.A. Herzen Moscow Oncology Research Institute. Patient recruitment is still ongoing.A total of 64 patients with high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer (сT3N0–T3N+М0, prostate specific antigen (PSA) ≥20 ng/mL, and Gleason score of 8–10)  were recruited since July 2016. All patients were examined prior to treatment initiation and after 3 and 6 courses of therapy. The examination included pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound imaging of the abdominal cavity and retroperitoneal space, transrectal ultrasound imaging, and chest radiography or computed tomography. Serum PSA level was evaluated before each course of therapy. Bone scintigraphy was performed before treatment and after its completion. Study participants were divided into two groups. Group A included patients that initially underwent surgical treatment and then 6 courses of CHT no later than 6 weeks after surgery: docetaxel 75 mg/m2 given intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle and oral prednisolone 10 mg/day. Patients also received hormonal therapy with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue (aLHRH) given in depot injections every 28 days.Group B included patients that initially received 6 courses of CHT: docetaxel 75 mg/m2 given intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle and oral prednisolone 10 mg/day. After that, patients underwent radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy no later than 4 weeks after the completion of chemotherapy. Patients also received hormonal therapy with aLHRH given in depot injections every 28 days. The total treatment duration was 6 months.Results. The group of adjuvant CHT included 24 patients with high-risk prostate cancer (T3b–4N+М0 with at least 5 regional lymph node metastases detected by morphological examination of surgical specimens). All patients had Gleason score 8–10 tumors. Mean age of patients was 63.0 ± 7.7 years (range: 46–72 years). In total, all patients received 142 courses of CHT. By the time of publishing this article, 23 (96 %) of patients completed their treatment.The group of neoadjuvant CHT included 40 patients with very high-risk prostate cancer (T3b–4N+М0 with metastases to pelvic and retroperitoneal lymph nodes detected by instrumental examination). All patients had Gleason score 8–10 tumors. Mean age of patients was 61.0± 6.4 years (range: 43–69 years). In total, all patients received 236 courses of CHT. By the time of publishing this article, 36 (90 %) of patients completed their treatment. Thirty-five patients (87 %) underwent radical prostatectomy with extensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy. Routine pathological examination demonstrated that all patients had signs of tumor destruction. Thirty-three participants (94 %) had grade II therapeutic pathomorphosis, whereas 2 patients (6 %) had grade III therapeutic pathomorphosis.Median PSA relapse-free survival (PSA-RFS) rate in the neoadjuvant CHT group was 10 months. Serum PSA of 0.1 ng/mL 1 month postoperatively correlated with longer RFS (р = 0.04). Biochemical relapse (PSA level >0.2 ng/mL) was observed in 6 patients (15 %) from this group. Later these patients received hormonal therapy with aLHRH. Median PSA-RFS in the adjuvant CHT group was 11 months.The main adverse events in the two groups were hematological toxicity, observed in 24 patients (34.29 %), and gastrointestinal toxicity, observed in 9 patients (12.86 %) (diarrhea (n = 6) and stomatitis (n = 3)). Only grade I–II toxicity was registered so far. Two patients (3.1 %) had febrile neutropenia, which required cytostatic dose reduction by 20 %. Relatively good tolerability and acceptable quality of life allowed the vast majority of patients to be treated on an outpatient basis.Conclusion. So far, we can make only a preliminary conclusion that adjuvant and neoadjuvant CHT is a promising treatment strategy for high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer.

The treatment of common forms of squamous cell carcinoma of the organs located on the head and neck that are not subject to surgical treatment is limited to the use of chemoradiotherapy with platinum derivatives or drug therapy with platinum-containing regimens. With the progression of the disease, ineffective 2‑line cytostatics were prescribed that did not fundamentally change the course of the tumor process. The introduction into clinical practice of drugs of the original mechanism of action has significantly increased the effectiveness of drug therapy during progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. The article presents two clinical observations that demonstrate the relevance of the strategy of using inhibitors of immune response control points after platinum preparations.