Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Diagnostik (1)
- Früherkennung (1)
- HPV-positive OPSCC (1)
- Mammakarzinom (1)
- Nachsorge (1)
- Richtlinie (1)
- TKI (1)
- antibodies (1)
- breast cancer (1)
- combined modality therapy (1)
Institute
- Medizin (4)
Purpose: The aim of this official guideline coordinated and published by the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the German Cancer Society (DKG) was to optimize the screening, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of breast cancer.
Methods: The process of updating the S3 guideline dating from 2012 was based on the adaptation of identified source guidelines which were combined with reviews of evidence compiled using PICO (Patients/Interventions/Control/Outcome) questions and the results of a systematic search of literature databases and the selection and evaluation of the identified literature. The interdisciplinary working groups took the identified materials as their starting point to develop recommendations and statements which were modified and graded in a structured consensus procedure.
Recommendations: Part 1 of this short version of the guideline presents recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and follow-up care of breast cancer. The importance of mammography for screening is confirmed in this updated version of the guideline and forms the basis for all screening. In addition to the conventional methods used to diagnose breast cancer, computed tomography (CT) is recommended for staging in women with a higher risk of recurrence. The follow-up concept includes suggested intervals between physical, ultrasound and mammography examinations, additional high-tech diagnostic procedures, and the determination of tumor markers for the evaluation of metastatic disease.
Background and Purpose: Targeted drugs have augmented the cancer treatment armamentarium. Based on the molecular specificity, it was initially believed that these drugs had significantly less side effects. However, currently it is accepted that all of these agents have their specific side effects. Based on the given multimodal approach, special emphasis has to be placed on putative interactions of conventional cytostatic drugs, targeted agents and other modalities. The interaction of targeted drugs with radiation harbours special risks, since the awareness for interactions and even synergistic toxicities is lacking. At present, only limited is data available regarding combinations of targeted drugs and radiotherapy. This review gives an overview on the current knowledge on such combined treatments.
Material and methods: Using the following MESH headings and combinations of these terms pubmed database was searched: Radiotherapy AND cetuximab / trastuzumab / panitumumab / nimotuzumab, bevacizumab, sunitinib / sorafenib / lapatinib / gefitinib / erlotinib / sirolimus, thalidomide / lenalidomide as well as erythropoietin. For citation crosscheck the ISI web of science database was used employing the same search terms.
Results: Several classes of targeted substances may be distinguished: Small molecules including kinase inhibitors and specific inhibitors, antibodies, and anti-angiogenic agents. Combination of these agents with radiotherapy may lead to specific toxicities or negatively influence the efficacy of RT. Though there is only little information on the interaction of molecular targeted radiation and radiotherapy in clinical settings, several critical incidents are reported.
Conclusions: The addition of molecular targeted drugs to conventional radiotherapy outside of approved regimens or clinical trials warrants a careful consideration especially when used in conjunction in hypo-fractionated regimens. Clinical trials are urgently needed in order to address the open question in regard to efficacy, early and late toxicity.
Simple Summary: The study compares the effects on complete remission rate (CR) of a single dose of durvalumab/tremelimumab immediately after a single-cycle platinum and docetaxel as part of induction therapy for a controlled trial in head and neck cancer with chemotherapy alone from a historical collective. The CR rate was 60.3% after induction chemoimmunotherapy (ICIT; induction chemotherapy plus double immune checkpoint blockade) compared with 40.3% after induction chemotherapy (IC) alone. Patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer may benefit the most from additive double checkpoint inhibition, which is presumably due to the higher amount of infiltrating immune cells. Patients older than 60 years without HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer are unlikely to benefit.
Abstract: To determine whether a single dose of double immune checkpoint blockade (induction chemoimmunotherapy (ICIT)) adds benefit to induction single-cycle platinum doublet (induction chemotherapy (IC)) in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), patients treated with cisplatin 30 mg/m2 d1-3 and docetaxel 75 mg/m2 d1 combined with durvalumab 1500 mg fixed dose d5 and tremelimumab 75 mg fixed dose d5 (ICIT) within the CheckRad-CD8 trial were compared with a retrospective cohort receiving the same chemotherapy (IC) without immunotherapy. The endpoint of this analysis was the complete response rate (CR). A total of 53 patients were treated with ICIT and 104 patients with IC only. CR rates were 60.3% for ICIT and 40.3% for IC (p = 0.018). In the total population (n = 157), the most important predictor to achieve a CR was treatment type (OR: 2.21 for ICIT vs. IC; p = 0.038, multivariate analysis). The most diverse effects in CR rates between ICIT and IC were observed in younger (age ≤ 60) patients with HPV-positive OPSCCs (82% vs. 33%, p = 0.176), while there was no difference in older patients without HPV-positive OPSCCs (53% vs. 48%). The analysis provides initial evidence that ICIT could result in higher CR rates than IC. Young patients with HPV-positive OPSCCs may have the greatest benefit from additional immune checkpoint inhibitors.