Добавил:
shahzodbeknormurodov27@gmail.com Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Practical Urology ( PDFDrive ).pdf
Скачиваний:
12
Добавлен:
27.08.2022
Размер:
25.91 Mб
Скачать

 

 

180

 

 

 

 

 

Practical Urology: EssEntial PrinciPlEs and PracticE

Immunotherapy

(sunitinib and sorafenib), mammalian target

 

 

of rapamycin inhibitors (temsirolimus), and

Until recently, treatment of mRCC has been

monoclonal antibodies (bevacizumab) appear

based on nephrectomy and limited use of toxic

to be the most promising agents for treatment

and often ineffective immunotherapy with

of mRCC. Table 13.3 presents a summary of

interferon-alpha (IFN-a) and interleukin-2 (IL-

phase III randomized controlled trials of

2). Both are beneficial only for mRCC patients

targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma.

with a good performance status and clear cell

Sunitinib, sorafenib, temsirolimus, and the

subtype histology. IFN-a (alpha) can be used as

combination bevacizumab with interferon-

comparative control arm for studies investigat-

alpha are approved for treatment of mRCC.33-37

ing the efficacy of new drugs for mRCC patients.

Sunitinib is advised as first-line therapy in

High-dose IL-2 may induce durable complete

low-and intermediate-risk mRCC patients.

responses in a minority of patients ranging

Bevacizumab and interferon-alpha can be con-

from 7% to 27%; however, it has more side

sidered as an additional option for first-line

effects than IFN-a (alpha). Combination of

therapy in these patients. Temsirolimus should

cytokines, with or without additional chemo-

be considered as first-line treatment in poor-

therapy, does not improve OS compared with

risk mRCC patients. Sorafenib has proven effi-

monotherapy.30

cacy as second-line therapy for mRCC after

 

 

failure of cytokine therapy. These new agents

Angiogenesis Inhibitor Drugs

improve quality of life and seem able to stabi-

lize mRCC for a prolonged period of time.30

Major advances in the understanding of the

The mTOR inhibitor everolimus also shows

promising results in patients with mRCC.38

molecular biology of RCC have led to the

Studies are ongoing to compare combination

development of several new therapies that tar-

therapies with single agents and to determine

get ligands at the molecular level, so-called

the efficacy of single agents as adjuvant ther-

“targeted therapies”. Figure 13.1 presents the

apy after nephrectomy.

major targets for these targeted therapies.

 

Small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors

 

Sunitinib

PDGF

Sorafenib

RAF kinase

Bevacizumab

VEGF

Temsirolimus

mTOR

Figure 13.1. targeted drugs with major inhibited targets for treatment of renal cell carcinoma. mtor: mammalian target of rapamycin kinase, Pdgf: platelet-derived growth factor, VEgf: vascular endothelial growth factor.

Conclusion

Angiogenesis inhibitor drugs have an important role in the management of mRCC. However, for a selected group of patients, high-dose IL-2 remains an option. More research and clinical studies are required to identify the optimal combination therapy for patients with mRCC and to define strategies for non-clear cell cancer. Questions regarding optimal sequence and timing of treatment options still need to be addressed.

Testicular Cancer

Testicular cancer is rare and rapidly progressive, but cure rates are almost 100%, regardless of treatment modality. Treatment of patients with testicular cancer is described in the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCG) report (part I and II).39,40

Table 13.3. randomized controlled trials of targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma (from Vakkalanka et al.32)

 

 

 

Study

Randomization

No. of

Objective response

Progression-free

 

 

patients

rate (%)

survival (months)

Escudier et al.33

Bevacizumab (10 mg/kg)

 

i.v. every 2 weeks and

 

ifn-a2a 9 mU s.c.three

 

times per week

rini et al.34

Bevacizumab (10 mg/kg)

 

i.v. every 2 weeks and

 

ifn-a9 mU s.c. three

 

times per week

vs. placebo and

649

31 vs. 13

10.2 vs. 5.4 (p = 0.0001)

ifn-a2a9 mU

 

 

 

s.c.three times per

 

 

 

week

 

 

 

vs. ifn-a9 mU

732

25.5 vs. 13.1

8.5 vs. 5.2 (p < 0.0001)

s.c.three times per

 

(p < 0.0001)

 

week

 

 

 

motzer et al.35

sunitinib (50 mg)p.o.

vs. ifn-a9 mU

 

750

31 vs. 6 (p < 0.001)

11 vs. 5 (p < 0.001)

 

daily

s.c.three times per

 

 

 

 

 

 

week

 

 

 

 

Escudier et al.36

sorafenib (400 mg)p.o.

vs. placebo

 

903

10 vs. 2

5.5 vs. 2.8 (p < 0.01)

 

twice daily

 

 

 

 

 

Hudes et al.37

temsirolimus (25 mg) i.v.

vs. ifn-a

vs. temsirolimus (15 mg)

626

4.8 vs. 8.6 vs. 8.1

3.1 vs. 5.5 vs. 4.7

 

weekly

3–18 mU s.c.three

i.v. weekly and ifn-a

 

 

 

 

 

times per week

6 mU s.c.three times

 

 

 

 

 

 

per week

 

 

 

IFN interferon, i.v. intravenous, MU million units, p.o. orally, s.c. subcutaneous.

cHEmotHEraPEUtic

181

oncology Urologic for agEnts