Survival is worse in renal cancer patients who were denied new drugs, small study indicates

BMJ ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 339 (sep09 1) ◽  
pp. b3661-b3661
Author(s):  
R. Dobson
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cancer ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Small Study

scholarly journals Tumoral ANXA1 Is a Predictive Marker for Sunitinib Treatment of Renal Cancer Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (19) ◽  
pp. 3975-3983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjut Niinivirta ◽  
Gunilla Enblad ◽  
Per-Henrik Edqvist ◽  
Fredrik Pontén ◽  
Anca Dragomir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cancer ◽  
Predictive Marker ◽  
Sunitinib Treatment

Retrospective analysis on safety and efficacy of everolimus in treatment of metastatic renal cancer patients receiving dialysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (23) ◽  
pp. 3159-3166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annalisa Guida ◽  
Cristina Masini ◽  
Michele Milella ◽  
Giuseppe Di Lorenzo ◽  
Matteo Santoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cancer ◽  
Safety And Efficacy

Retrospective study for the characterization of COVID-19 in renal cancer (COVID-REN) patients treated with antiangiogenics or immunotherapy and outcome comparison with non-infected cases.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4577-4577
Author(s):  
Jesus Garcia Donas ◽  
Guillermo de Velasco ◽  
Teresa Alonso Gordoa ◽  
Jesús Chamorro ◽  
Diana Rosero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Advanced Renal Cancer ◽  
Treatment Interruptions ◽  
Outcome Comparison ◽  
Cancer Outcome ◽  
The Impact

4577 Background: Cancer is recognized as a major risk factor for severe COVID19. However little is known about the impact of oncologic treatments in the evolution of the disease. On the other hand, the influence of SARS-CoV2 in cancer response remains to be established. We aim to determine both aspects in renal cancer patients receiving different therapeutic options. Methods: We designed a retrospective case-control study to compare the outcome of patients with advanced renal cancer who developed COVID19 under antiangiogenic treatment (cohort A [ChA]) vs immunotherapy (alone or in combination: cohort B [ChB]) vs matched controls (cohort C [ChC]). Controls were renal cancer patients who were not infected during the period of study. One control per case was selected regarding age, gender, kidney cancer histology and type of treatment. Results: From May 20 to Feb 21, 80 patients were recruited. We present the first 55 patients included (15 ChA, 16 ChB and 20 ChC, 4 patients were screening failure) from 13 centers in Spain. Median age was 62 (range 25 to 88) overall and 62 (range 44 to 88) in Ch A, 64,5 (range 42 to 83) in ChB and 61 (range 41 to 77) in ChC. 38 patients were male and 13 were female. Overall 45 cases were clear cell carcinoma (13 ChA, 14 ChB and 18 ChC), 4 papillary (1 ChA, 2 ChB and 1 ChC), 1 chromophobe (ChA) and 1 unclassified (ChC). Median number of prior lines of treatment was 2 (range 1 to 6) overall, (1 [range 1 to 4] in ChA, 2 [range 1 to 4] in ChB and 2 [range 1 to 6] in ChC). 25 patients required treatment interruptions (8 in ChA [32%], 14 in ChB [56%] and 3 [12%] in ChC). 9 patients were hospitalized (4 in Ch A, 5 in ChB and none in ChC) for a median of 10 days (range 4 to 16) overall (7 [range 4 to 14] in ChA and 12 [range 5 to 16] in ChB). No patient required ICU admission. Best tumor response was complete or partial (CR+PR) in 25 patients (5 [20%] in ChA, 9 [36%] in ChB and 11 [44%] in ChC). Clinical benefit (CR+PR+stable disease) was observed in 38 patients (11 [28,9%] in ChA, 10 [26,3%] in ChB and 17 [44,7%] in ChC). One patient in ChB died (due to COVID19). Updated results will be presented. Conclusions: Patients with renal cancer who developed COVID19 held treatment more frequently and presented lower clinical benefit rates than non infected cases. Patients receiving immunotherapy required more frequent dose interruptions and longer hospitalizations than cases on antiangiogenics. These results point to an impact of SARS-CoV2 in renal cancer outcome. Therapies administered to treat renal cancer, could play a role in the evolution of COVID19.

scholarly journals The Biological Context of C-Reactive Protein as a Prognostic Marker in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Studies on the Acute Phase Cytokine Profile

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 1961 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helene Hersvik Aarstad ◽  
Gigja Guðbrandsdottir ◽  
Karin M. Hjelle ◽  
Leif Bostad ◽  
Øystein Bruserud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cancer ◽  
Acute Phase ◽  
High Serum ◽  
Cytokine Profile ◽  
Phase Reaction ◽  
C Reactive Protein ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Impact

High serum levels of the acute phase protein C-reactive protein (CRP) are associated with an adverse prognosis in renal cancer. The acute phase reaction is cytokine-driven and includes a wide range of inflammatory mediators. This overall profile of the response depends on the inducing event and can also differ between patients. We investigated an extended acute phase cytokine profile for 97 renal cancer patients. Initial studies showed that the serum CRP levels had an expected prognostic association together with tumor size, stage, nuclear grading, and Leibovich score. Interleukin (IL)6 family cytokines, IL1 subfamily mediators, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α can all be drivers of the acute phase response. Initial studies suggested that serum IL33Rα (the soluble IL33 receptor α chain) levels were also associated with prognosis, although the impact of IL33Rα is dependent on the overall cytokine profile, including seven IL6 family members (IL6, IL6Rα, gp130, IL27, IL31, CNTF, and OSM), two IL1 subfamily members (IL1RA and IL33Rα), and TNFα. We identified a patient subset characterized by particularly high levels of IL6, IL33Rα, and TNFα alongside an adverse prognosis. Thus, the acute phase cytokine reaction differs between renal cancer patients, and differences in the acute phase cytokine profile are associated with prognosis.

Enrollment of Elderly Patients in Clinical Trials for Cancer Drug Registration: A 7-Year Experience by the US Food and Drug Administration

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (22) ◽  
pp. 4626-4631 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lilia Talarico ◽  
Gang Chen ◽  
Richard Pazdur
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Drug Administration ◽  
Food And Drug Administration ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Therapies ◽  
Age Related ◽  
The Us

Purpose To analyze the age-related enrollment of cancer patients onto registration trials of new drugs or new indications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from 1995 to 2002. Patients and Methods This study involved retrospective analyses of demographic data of cancer patients enrolled onto registration trials. The data on 28,766 cancer patients from 55 registration trials were analyzed according to age distributions of ≥ 65, ≥ 70, and ≥ 75 years. The rates of enrollment in each age group for each cancer were compared with the corresponding rates in the US cancer population. The age distributions of the US cancer population were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute for the period 1995 to 1999 based on the 2000 US Census. Results The proportions of the overall patient populations aged ≥ 65, ≥ 70, and ≥ 75 years were 36%, 20%, and 9% compared with 60%, 46%, and 31%, respectively, in the US cancer population. Statistically significant under-representation of the elderly (P < .001) was noted in registration trials for all cancer treatment except for breast cancer hormonal therapies. Patients aged ≥ 70 years accounted for most of the under-representation. Conclusion Elderly were under-represented in the registration trials of new cancer therapies. Various strategies may be needed to evaluate cancer therapies for the elderly in prospective clinical trials and to improve cancer care in the elderly population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document