36 research outputs found
Author Correction: COVID-19 vaccine guidance for patients with cancer participating in oncology clinical trials
No full textIn the original version of this Perspective, the name of the author Giuseppe Curigliano was incorrectly written as Guiseppe Curigiliano. The affiliations have been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the manuscrip
Cardiovascular Toxicity Profiles of Vascular-Disrupting Agents
No full textAbstract
Background.
Vascular-disrupting agents (VDAs) represent a new class of chemotherapeutic agent that targets the existing vasculature in solid tumors. Preclinical and early-phase trials have demonstrated the promising therapeutic benefits of VDAs but have also uncovered a distinctive toxicity profile highlighted by cardiovascular events.
Methods.
We reviewed all preclinical and prospective phase I–III clinical trials published up to August 2010 in MEDLINE and the American Association of Cancer Research and American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting abstracts of small-molecule VDAs, including combretastatin A4 phosphate (CA4P), combretastatin A1 phosphate (CA1P), MPC-6827, ZD6126, AVE8062, and ASA404.
Results.
Phase I and II studies of CA1P, ASA404, MPC-6827, and CA4P all reported cardiovascular toxicities, with the most common cardiac events being National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (version 3) grade 1–3 hypertension, tachyarrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, and myocardial infarction. Cardiac events were dose-limiting toxicities in phase I trials with VDA monotherapy and combination therapy.
Conclusions.
Early-phase trials of VDAs have revealed a cardiovascular toxicity profile similar to that of their vascular-targeting counterparts, the angiogenesis inhibitors. As these agents are added to the mainstream chemotherapeutic arsenal, careful identification of baseline cardiovascular risk factors would seem to be a prudent strategy. Close collaboration with cardiology colleagues for early indicators of serious cardiac adverse events will likely minimize toxicity while optimizing the therapeutic potential of VDAs and ultimately enhancing patient outcomes.
</jats:sec
Activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin signaling pathway in hepatocellular carcinoma
No full textNext generation sequencing of carcinoma of unknown primary reveals novel combinatorial strategies in a heterogeneous mutational landscape
No full textEstablishing an Integrative Oncology Service: Essential Aspects of Program Development.
No full textPURPOSE OF REVIEW
Over the last 2 decades, integrative oncology (IO) has seen exponential growth within cancer care. It aims to combine evidence-based complementary therapies with conventional treatments to improve the well-being and quality of life for individuals dealing with cancer. The proliferation of integrative medicine programs in major cancer centers globally reflects varying approaches shaped by cultural, demographic, and resource-based factors.
RECENT FINDINGS
Drawing upon the expertise of leaders in IO from the Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) Clinical Practice Committee, this manuscript serves as a practical guide for establishing an IO practice. Collating insights from diverse professionals, including oncologists, integrative oncologists, supportive care physicians, researchers, and clinicians, the paper aims to provide a comprehensive roadmap for initiating and advancing IO services. The primary objective is to bridge the gap between conventional cancer care and complementary therapies, fostering a patient-centric approach to address the multifaceted challenges encountered by individuals with cancer. This paper delineates several key sections elucidating different aspects of IO practice. It delves into the core components necessary for an IO service's foundation, outlines the initial medical consultation process, and presents crucial tools essential for successful consultations. By consolidating insights and expertise, this manuscript seeks to facilitate the integration of IO into mainstream cancer care, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes and experiences
Recommended from our members
Older adults in phase I clinical trials: a comparative analysis of participation and clinical benefit rate among older adults versus middle age and AYA patients on phase I clinical trials with VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors
No full textBackgroundOlder adults aged 65 years and above remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials. We hypothesized that older participation in early phase trials with VEGF/VEGFR (VEGF/R) inhibitors was lower than cancer prevalence in this group and lower than other age groups (middle age, adolescent/young adults [AYA]).ResultsOf 1489 patients, 278 were older adults (18%, median age 68.9y), 220 AYA (15%, median age 32.6 y), 991 middle age (67%, median age 53.8 y). Common malignancies included gastrointestinal (n = 438, 29%), gynecologic (n = 234, 16%), and thoracic/head/neck (n = 216, 15%). Median time to treatment failure did not vary significantly between the 3 age-based cohorts (3m in older adults, 3.5 m middle age, 3.3 m AYA). OR of achieving clinical benefit in older adults vs middle age (OR 1.10, p 0.19 [two-tailed], p 0.09 [one-tailed]) and AYA vs middle age (OR 0.85, p 0.31 [proportions z-test, two tailed], p 0.15 [one-tailed]) showed no significant differences.ConclusionsOlder adults accounted for <20% of participants on phase I clinical trials with VEGF/R inhibitors but those who participated were just as likely to achieve a clinical benefit as AYA and middle age patients. These findings merit further exploration into patient selection for early phase trials.MethodsWe identified and separated patients treated on VEGF/R-inhibitor-based phase I trials from 12/1/2004-07/31/2013 into 3 age-based cohorts, AYA (15-39y), middle age (40-64 y), older adults (65 y+). We analyzed clinical/treatment characteristics and response outcomes, calculating the odds ratios (OR) of clinical benefit (defined as SD ≥ 6months, PR, CR) for older adults and AYAs versus middle age participants
COVID-19 vaccine guidance for patients with cancer participating in oncology clinical trials
No full textPatients with cancer have a high risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines has provided new hope of mitigating the disease. Herein, the COVID19 and Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group calls for prioritization of patients with cancer, importantly including those participating in oncology clinical trials, for COVID-19 vaccination. The authors also provide operational COVID-19 vaccine guidance for patients participating in oncology clinical trials.
Emerging efficacy data have led to the emergency use authorization or approval of COVID-19 vaccines in several countries worldwide. Most trials of COVID-19 vaccines excluded patients with active malignancies, and thus data on the safety, tolerability and efficacy of the vaccines in patients with cancer are currently limited. Given the risk posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, decisions regarding the use of vaccines against COVID-19 in patients participating in trials of investigational anticancer therapies need to be addressed promptly. Patients should not have to choose between enrolling on oncology clinical trials and receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Clinical trial sponsors, investigators and treating physicians need operational guidance on COVID-19 vaccination for patients with cancer who are currently enrolled or might seek to enrol in clinical trials. Considering the high morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in patients with cancer, the benefits of vaccination are likely to far outweigh the risks of vaccine-related adverse events. Herein, we provide operational COVID-19 vaccine guidance for patients participating in oncology clinical trials. In our perspective, continued quality oncological care requires that patients with cancer, including those involved in trials, be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination, which should not affect trial eligibility
Abstract 4700: One size does not fit all: Fingerprinting advanced carcinoma of unknown primary through comprehensive profiling identifies aberrant activation of the PI3K and MAPK signaling cascades in concert with impaired cell cycle arrest
No full textAbstract 604: Impaired cell cycle arrest with concurrent epigenetic deregulation identified through next generation sequencing in patients with advanced carcinoma of unknown primary: Implications for personalized medicine
No full text
