scholarly journals Targeting Angiogenesis in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Resistance Mechanisms

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (19) ◽  
pp. 4949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pozas ◽  
San Román ◽  
Alonso-Gordoa ◽  
Pozas ◽  
Caracuel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽  
Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Initial Response ◽  
Somatostatin Analogues ◽  
Resistance Mechanisms ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽  
Optimal Sequence

Despite being infrequent tumors, the incidence and prevalence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (P-NETs) has been rising over the past few decades. In recent years, rigorous phase III clinical trials have been conducted, allowing the approval of several drugs that have become the standard of care in these patients. Although various treatments are used in clinical practice, including somatostatin analogues (SSAs), biological therapies like sunitinib or everolimus, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) or even chemotherapy, a consensus regarding the optimal sequence of treatment has not yet been reached. Notwithstanding, sunitinib is largely used in these patients after the promising results shown in SUN111 phase III clinical trial. However, both prompt progression as well as tumor recurrence after initial response have been reported, suggesting the existence of primary and acquired resistances to this antiangiogenic drug. In this review, we aim to summarize the most relevant mechanisms of angiogenesis resistance that are key contributors of tumor progression and dissemination. Furthermore, several targeted molecules acting selectively against these pathways have shown promising results in preclinical models, and preliminary results from ongoing clinical trials are awaited.

scholarly journals The state of PRRT and its sequencing amongst current therapeutic options for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren M Raymond ◽  
Tetiana Korzun ◽  
Adel Kardosh ◽  
Kenneth J. Kolbeck ◽  
Rodney Pommier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy ◽  
Somatostatin Analogues ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Its Sequencing ◽  
Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽  
Reduce Tumor Burden ◽  
Spectrum Of Patients

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are the most common form of neuroendocrine neoplasia, but there is no current consensus for the sequencing of approved therapies, particularly with respect to peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). This comprehensive review evaluates the data supporting approved therapies for GEP-NETs and recommendations for therapeutic sequencing with a focus on how PRRT currently fits within sequencing algorithms. The current recommendations for PRRT sequencing restrict its use to metastatic, inoperable, progressive midgut NETs, however, this may change with emerging data to suggest PRRT might be beneficial as neoadjuvant therapy for inoperable tumors, is more tolerable than other treatment modalities following first-line standard dose somatostatin analogues, and can be used as salvage therapy after disease relapse following prior successful cycles of PRRT. PRRT has also been shown to reduce tumor burden, improve quality of life, and prolong the time to disease progression in a broad spectrum of patients with GEP-NETs. As the various potential benefits of PRRT in GEP-NET therapy continues to expand, it is necessary to review and critically evaluate our treatment algorithms for GEP-NETs.

scholarly journals Indications of Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT) in Gastroenteropancreatic and Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Tumors: An Updated Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 1267
Author(s):  
Baptiste Camus ◽  
Anne-Ségolène Cottereau ◽  
Lola-Jade Palmieri ◽  
Solène Dermine ◽  
Florence Tenenbaum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽  
Radionuclide Therapy ◽  
Somatostatin Receptors ◽  
Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Double Dose ◽  
Peptide Receptor ◽  
Phase Iii Study

Radionuclide therapy for neuroendocrine tumors is a form of systemic radiotherapy that allows the administration of targeted radionuclides into tumor cells that express a large quantity of somatostatin receptors. The two most commonly used radio-peptides for radionuclide therapy in neuroendocrine tumors are 90Y-DOTATOC and 177Lu-DOTATATE. Radio-peptides have been used for several years in the treatment of advanced neuroendocrine tumors. Recently, the randomized Phase III study NETTER-1 compared177Lu-DOTATATE versus high-dose (double-dose) octreotide LAR in patients with metastatic midgut neuroendocrine tumors, and demonstrated its efficacy in this setting. Strong signals in favor of efficiency seem to exist for other tumors, in particular for pancreatic and pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. This focus on radionuclide therapy in gastroenteropancreatic and pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors addresses the treatment modalities, the validated and potential indications, and the safety of the therapy.

PP126 MEA In Italy: Correlation Between Time To Payment By Result And Time To Off Treatment Curve

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 131-132
Author(s):  
Gabriele Vittoria ◽  
Antonio Fascì ◽  
Matteo Ferrario ◽  
Giovanni Giuliani
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Experimental Drug ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Line Of Therapy ◽  
Mean Time

INTRODUCTION:Payment by result agreements have been quite widely used in Italy to provide access for high costs oncologic drugs and minimize uncertainties of real life benefits (1). The aim of this analysis was to overview the Roche experience in terms of Payment by Result (Pbr) in oncology and investigate the relation between timing for the evaluation of treatment failures and observed Time to Off Treatment (TTOT) from Phase III clinical trials (2).METHODS:A retrospective analysis of the Roche payment by results schemes in place in Italy was conducted. For each drug included in the analysis it was collected: (i) the negotiated timing to assess the treatment failure for payment by result, (ii) the median time to off treatment curve observed in clinical trials for the experimental drug, (iii) the median time to off treatment observed in clinical trials for the control arm. The mean ratios between timing to assess the treatment failure for payment by result and the time to off treatment observed for the experimental drug or the median time to off treatment observed in the control arm were calculated to identify potential correlations. High level of correlation was expected if ratio was close to 1 (±.2).RESULTS:Roche products or different indications of the same product were identified as candidates for the analysis from 2008 to 2016. The timing for the evaluation of treatment failures for Pbr varies between 2 and 9 months, depending on the type of tumor and line of therapy. The mean Time to Payment By Result (TTPbr) / Control arm Time To Off Treatment (cTTOT) ratio was 1.16 (±.37) while the mean Time to Payment By Result (TTPbr) / Experimental arm Time To Off Treatment (eTTOT) ratio was .71 (±.13). Data analysis according to different time periods shows that the mean TTPbr/cTTOT and TTPbr/eTTOT for drugs negotiated from 2008 to 2015 were respectively 1.07 and 1.39 whereas for drugs negotiated in 2016 were respectively and .63 and 1.CONCLUSIONS:Good level of correlation between TTPbr and cTTOT was found. This finding is in line with the methodology used by Italian Medicines Agency so far, leveraging the cTTOT as the most appropriate proxy to assess any incremental effect of a new drug compared to the previous Standard of Care. The analysis over time of TTPbr shows that in the first years of payment by result negotiation TTPbr is more correlated to the cTTOT whereas in the last years is moving closer to the experimental one.

scholarly journals Chronic lymphocytic leukemia paradigm continues to be refined: news from the American Society of Hematology 2018 annual meeting

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. IJH14
Author(s):  
Stefano Molica
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Prospective Phase ◽  
American Society ◽  
Anti Cd20

There were a number of important updates and advances presented at the 2018 Annual American Society of Hematology meeting. With respect to the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, the American Society of Hematology 2018 was notable for an improved understanding of ibrutinib-based therapies. In fact, three prospective Phase III trials presented at the meeting indicate, in turn, that ibrutinib alone, ibrutinib plus rituximab, or ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab, should be the new standard of care for chronic lymphocytic leukemia. However, additional clinical trials comparing chemo-immunotherapy with ibrutinib alone or in association with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody remain a reasonable avenue to complete results of these large studies.

Histopathological and Immunophenotypic Changes of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors after Neoadjuvant Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT)

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-131
Author(s):  
Marco Schiavo Lena ◽  
Stefano Partelli ◽  
Paola Castelli ◽  
Valentina Andreasi ◽  
Chanel Elisha Smart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽  
Radionuclide Therapy ◽  
Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy ◽  
Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽  
Peptide Receptor

Use of placebo in cancer medicine: The experience of a National Clinical Trials organization

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6104-6104
Author(s):  
J. L. Pater ◽  
W. Parulekar
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Supportive Care ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Design Data ◽  
Standard Of Care Treatment ◽  
Prevention Trials ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Phase Iii Studies

6104 Background: The use of placebos in cancer clinical trials requires careful evaluation. Factors that must be considered include the impact of placebo on endpoint measurement, the efficacy of placebo relative to standard of care treatment, patient altruism/acceptance of a non-active intervention and the resulting increase in complexity of study conduct with respect to randomization, drug supply, data management, analysis and the unblinding process. Methods: We reviewed the experience of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group with the use of placebo in the randomized phase III setting from 1982–2005. Results: Since 1982, 34 studies were identified that utilized a placebo as part of study design. Data is presented below according to the type of study and date of study activation. The numbers in brackets represent those studies in which placebo was used alone in the control arm. Supportive care studies were the most common type of study employing a placebo as part of study design and constituted almost 50% of our Group’s experience. Therapeutic studies involving placebo were conducted in multiple sites including breast (4), lung (6), myeloma (1), melanoma (1), ovary (1) and pancreas (1). Conclusion: Phase III studies involving a placebo constitute an important part of our clinical trial activity and cross the spectrum of supportive care, therapeutic and prevention trials. The use of placebo in cancer studies may increase due to the relative ease of blinding in studies that evaluate targeted, oral therapies with minimal toxicities as well as the need for unbiased assessment of increasingly used endpoints such as time to progression. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document