Onco'Zine - Today

Latest Videos - Onco'Zine

The Lancet Oncology

Showing posts with label risk factor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label risk factor. Show all posts

Saturday, October 3, 2009

New Findings Could Be Practice-changing for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Patients with soft-tissue sarcomas at high risk of spreading were 30% more likely to be alive and cancer free almost three years after starting treatment if their tumours were heated at the time they received chemotherapy, according to new research. The finding bolsters the case for intensifying exploration of the strategy in other types of cancer.

The study, which found that the addition of the innovative heat technique more than doubled the proportion of patients whose tumors responded to chemotherapy without increasing toxicity, is also the first to show that any treatment other than surgery followed by radiation can prolong survival of this type of patient.

“These findings provide a new standard treatment option and we believe they are likely to change the way many specialists treat these tumors,” said the study’s leader, Professor Rolf Issels, a professor of medical oncology at Klinikum Grosshadern Medical Center at the University of Munich in Germany, who presented the results in Berlin, Germany, at Europe’s largest cancer congress, ECCO 15 – ESMO 34, the joint 15th European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) and 34th European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Multidisciplinary Congress, September 20 – 24), meeting in Berlin, Germany.

“But the implications of these findings are more far-reaching,” Issels said. “This is also the first clear evidence that targeted heat therapy adds to chemotherapy. We expect our findings will encourage other researchers to test the approach in other locally advanced cancers. Targeted heat therapy has already shown promise in recurrent breast and locally advanced cervical cancer in combination with radiation and studies combining it with chemotherapy in other localized tumors such as those in the pancreas and rectum are ongoing.”

Soft tissue sarcomas involve cancer that starts in the soft, supporting tissues of the body, such as muscle, fat, blood vessels, nerves, tendons, tissue around the joints and deep layers of the skin. They are relatively rare, accounting for about three percent of all cancers, but are more common in children and young adults. Surgery is the primary treatment, but sometimes these tumors are difficult to remove completely, so they are often also treated with radiotherapy and sometimes chemotherapy. However, in cases where the disease is localized, the benefits of chemotherapy have been shown to be limited. In high-risk patients, any relapse usually occurs within two or three years. Survival varies widely depending on the location and severity of the tumor, with abdominal sarcomas being the most deadly.

The phase III study involved 341 patients being treated at several centers in Europe and the United States between July 1997 and November 2006 for locally advanced soft tissue sarcomas that were at high risk of recurrence and spread. More than half of the tumors were located in the abdomen, while the rest were in the arms and legs. All patients were given chemotherapy before and after surgery and radiotherapy.

Half were randomly given targeted heat treatment along with the chemotherapy. The technique, known as regional hyperthermia, uses focused electromagnetic energy to warm the tissue in and around the tumor to between 40 and 43 degrees Celsius (104 – 109.4 degrees Fahrenheit). The heat not only kills cancer cells, but it also seems to make chemotherapy work better by making cancer cells more sensitive. It also improves blood flow, which allows chemotherapy to be more effective.

After an average follow-up of 34 months, only 153 patients (44.9%) in total had died. The improvement in overall survival was not statistically meaningful when all patients were analyzed, but an analysis of the 269 who completed the full treatment of either four cycles of initial chemotherapy alone or four chemotherapy cycles and eight heat treatments found that those who got the heat therapy were 44% less likely to die during the follow-up period than those who got chemotherapy alone.

The patients receiving the targeted heat therapy fared better on all outcome measurements,” Issels noted. “Almost three years after starting treatment, they were 42% less likely to experience a recurrence of their cancer at the same site or to die than those who were getting chemotherapy alone, surviving an estimated 120 months before local progression of their disease, compared with an estimated 75 months. Similarly, the average length of time that patients remained disease free was 32 months in the group that got both treatments, compared with 18 months in the group that got chemotherapy alone – an improvement of 30%.”

At two years, 76 percent of the patients in the heat therapy group were still alive without local progression of their cancer, compared with 61 percent in the chemotherapy alone group. The proportion of patients who experienced tumor shrinkage rose from 12.7% in the chemotherapy alone group to 28.8%, while the proportion of patients who saw their tumor grow was 6.8% in the heat therapy group, compared with 20% in the chemotherapy alone group.

The most frequent side effect of the heat therapy was mild to moderate discomfort, reported in 45% of patients. The most serious side effect was severe burns, seen in one patient (0.6%). Blisters occurred in 17.8%.

“This strategy has been in development for about 20 years, with about 150 leading groups studying it, but the clear results of this trial show that the field has now matured to the point where we must step up efforts to explore its potential to offer an entirely new way of treating locally advanced disease in several major cancers,” explained Issels. “That will take investment from public funders to underwrite trials that investigate, for instance, whether it will be possible to reduce the dose of chemotherapy drugs by boosting their effectiveness with targeted heat therapy and whether the technique can enhance the effectiveness of newer targeted drugs.”

"Other questions remaining include whether targeted heat therapy can play a role in stimulating the immune system to more effectively attack cancer," Issels said, adding that "studies of heat shock protein therapy indicate that they may activate the immune system against the disease."

The study was funded by the German Cancer Foundation, Deutsche Krebshilfe and the Helmholtz Assocation, Germany’s largest scientific organization.

For more information:
  • Abstract no: 1 LBA. Presidential session II, Tuesday 12.15-14.15 hrs CEST (Hall 1)

Comprehensive Study Shows Prostate Cancer Patients on Hormone Therapy are at Greater Risk for Heart Disease

New research has found that hormone therapy used to treat men with advanced prostate cancer is associated with an increased chance of developing various heart problems. Some choices of therapy appear, however, to be less risky than others.

Researchers told Europe’s biggest cancer congress, ECCO 15 – ESMO 34, the joint 15th European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) and 34th European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Multidisciplinary Congress, September 20 – 24 in Berlin, Germany, that the findings of their study, the largest and most comprehensive to date on the issue, indicate that doctors need to start considering heart-related side effects when they prescribe endocrine therapy for prostate cancer and might want to refer patients to a cardiologist before starting treatment.

A few smaller studies have indicated that some types of hormone therapy increase the risk of coronary heart disease and heart attacks in prostate cancer patients, but others have found no increased risk. This is the first large study to investigate how the broader range of hormone therapies affect a wider range of heart problems and provides for the first time a detailed picture of the impact of each sort of hormone therapy on individual types of heart trouble.

“If we have observed a causative effect, then for all hormone therapies put together, we estimate that compared with what’s normal in the general population, about 10 extra ischemic heart disease events a year will appear for every 1,000 prostate cancer patients treated with such drugs,” said the study’s leader, Ms Mieke Van Hemelrijck, a PhD student and cancer epidemiologist at King’s College in London.

“However, not all types of therapy were associated with the risk of heart problems to the same degree. We found that drugs which block testosterone from binding to the prostate cells were associated with the least heart risk, while those that reduce the production of testosterone were associated with a higher risk. This may have implications for treatment choice.”

Prostate cancer is diagnosed in more than 670,000 men each year worldwide, making it the second most common cancer among men worldwide, after lung cancer. Hormone therapy is a mainstay of treatment when the cancer is locally advanced and when it has spread to more distant parts of the body, but is increasingly being used in earlier stages of the disease. It involves either removing the testicles to eliminate the main source of testosterone production, injections of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists to dramatically reduce the production of testosterone from the testicles or anti-androgen pills, which do not reduce the amount of testosterone produced but block it from attaching the prostate cells. Doctors sometimes use a combination of those approaches.

In the study, researchers analyzed the link in 30,642 Swedish men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer who had received hormone therapy as primary treatment for their disease between 1997 and 2006. The men were followed for an average of three years. The researchers calculated the risk of developing ischemic heart disease, heart attacks, arrhythmia and heart failure requiring hospitalization as well as the risk of dying from these heart diseases by comparing the rates among the cancer patients with what’s normal in the general Swedish population. Most patients got one of the three hormone treatment choices, but 38% got a combination of the two types of drugs.

“We found that prostate cancer patients treated with hormone therapy had an elevated risk of developing all of the individual types of heart problems and that they were more likely than normal to die from those causes,” Van Hemelrijck noted, adding that the problems started happening within a few months of initiating treatment.

Overall, prostate cancer patients treated with hormone therapy had a 24% increased risk of a non-fatal heart attack, a 19% increased risk of arrhythmia, a 31% increased risk of ischemic heart disease and a 26% increased risk of heart failure. The risk of a fatal heart attack was increased by 28%, the risk of dying from heart disease by 21%, the risk of heart failure death was increased by 26% and the risk of fatal arrhythmia was increased by 5%.

“In a more detailed analysis by type of hormone therapy, the lowest increase in risk for ischemic heart disease, heart attack and heart failure was seen in the group taking anti-androgen therapy, and we saw no increase in risk of death from heart disease in this group,” Van Hemelrijck explained. “Patients on gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist therapy had the highest risk of these problems.”

For instance, the increased heart failure risk for anti-androgens was 5%, compared with 34% for gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists and the increased ischemic heart disease risk was 13% in the anti-androgen group, compared with 30% in the gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist therapy group.

“The finding that anti-androgens carry the least heart risk supports the view that circulating testosterone may protect the heart. The association with heart risk when the testicles were removed was close to that seen with the gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist therapy,” Van Hemelrijck added.

The increased risk of heart events requiring hospitalization was less pronounced in patients who already had heart disease before hormone treatment, with a 17% risk increase for a new ischemic heart disease event among those with a history of heart disease, compared with a 41% increase among men who didn’t have any heart trouble before hormone treatment, for instance. Van Hemelrijck said that could be because the men who already had heart disease were likely to be taking heart medications that protected them from further heart risk imposed by the endocrine treatment.

“We now need studies verifying the association and exploring plausible biological mechanisms. Then we would know how to best use these treatments according to a patient’s history of various types of heart disease and whether it would be a good idea to give patients heart medicines to counteract these side effects,” Van Hemelrijck concluded.

The study was funded by the Swedish Research Council, the Stockholm Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK.

For more information:
  • Abstract no: 0272. Presidential session, Tuesday 12.15 hrs CEST (Hall 1)

Also read these PubMed Abstracts:

Illustration courtesy of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Monday, September 28, 2009

International Trial Shows Aspirin Protects Against Colorectal Cancer

A daily dose of aspirin can prevent the occurrence of cancer in people with a genetic predisposition towards Lynch syndrome, a condition which accounts for around five percent of all colon cancers, a scientist told the audience at Europe’s largest cancer congress, ECCO 15 – ESMO 34, the joint 15th European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) and 34th European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Multidisciplinary Congress, September 20 – 24 in Berlin, Germany.

Professor John Burn, from the Institute of Human Genetics, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, said that he believed that he and his colleagues might have uncovered a simple way of controlling cancer stem cells, which are essential to the formation of malignant tumors.

The clinical trial, which involved 1071 carriers of the Lynch syndrome mutation in 42 centers worldwide, randomized participants to a daily dose of 600mg aspirin and/or 30g Novelose®, a resistant starch that escapes digestion in the small intestine. “Although there were many reports that aspirin might have a beneficial effect in a range of cancers,” said Prof Burn, “they were from case control and epidemiological studies. We decided that the only way to achieve conclusive proof was to undertake a randomized trial in a high risk population.”

Lynch syndrome, often called hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC), is a rare type type of inherited cancer of the digestive tract that increases a patient’s risk of cancer, particularly the colon and rectum. People with Lynch syndrome have an increased risk of cancers of the stomach, small intestine, liver, gallbladder ducts, upper urinary tract, brain, skin, and prostate. Women carriers also have a high risk of developing endometrial and ovarian cancers.

These patients tend to develop cancer quickly, so the scientists expected to see answers at an early stage. The first results were disappointing, however; at an average of 29 months after randomization the scientists saw no evidence of the benefits of aspirin in the high-risk population studied.

Our original design allowed for long term post trial follow-up,” noted Prof Burn. “We have managed to track down most of those who completed the trial – around 75% of the original consent cohort – with information extending up to 10 years from randomization. We found that, around four years after randomization, there was a divergence in the incidence of cancers between the aspirin and placebo groups. To date, there have been only six colon cancers in the aspirin group as opposed to 16 who took placebo. There is also a reduction in endometrial cancer. This is a statistically significant result and we are delighted – all the more so because we stopped giving the aspirin after four years, yet the effect is continuing, and is directly correlated with the duration of aspirin use on the trial.”

Although scientists believe that diet is a major factor in the prevention of colorectal cancers, there are no randomized trial data which can prove it, since running proper, controlled trials of diet is extremely difficult. However, there is a strong inverse relationship between colon cancer and how much starch people eat. Resistant starch, after escaping digestion in the upper gut, is fermented in the colon and forms short chain fatty acids, which are powerful anti-cancer agents.

“Our very large colon probably evolved to capture such nutrients from our forefathers’ diets,” explained Prof Burn. “Because we were giving starch as well as aspirin we would also have expected to see a decrease in cancers in the placebo group. However, there could be a number of reasons for this result – perhaps patients didn’t take the starch every day, or that it simply wasn’t resistant enough.”

There were minor problems due to aspirin side effects; out of over 1000 people, 11 in the aspirin group had notable gastro-intestinal bleeds or ulcers as opposed to nine in the placebo group. But this was counter-balanced by fewer strokes and heart attacks in the aspirin group.

The mechanism by which aspirin protects against cancer has yet to be elucidated, but the scientists believe that cancer stem cells are involved. “We do not think that the mechanisms discussed to date are likely to provide an explanation,” said Prof Burn. “For example, the inflammatory enzyme COX2(Cyclooxygenase-2), a protein that acts as an enzyme and specifically catalyzes the production of certain chemical messengers called prostaglandins, is over-expressed in early cancer, but our results suggest an effect that predates the cancer, and may even predate the adenoma which precedes it. We believe that aspirin may have an effect on the survival of aberrant stem cells in the colon. These cancer stem cells are normally resistant to chemotherapy, but if a stem cell mutates but does not reveal its potential until an adenoma is formed, and if aspirin reduced the chances of such cells surviving, this would explain our results.”

The team intends to undertake a further study to see whether a smaller dose of aspirin would have the same beneficial effect or not. “We are planning to ask people with Lynch syndrome to agree to ‘toss a coin’ and take, say, either one or two aspirin tablets per day. Then we can see whether the people on the lower dose have the same protection, with fewer side effects. The problem is that, to have a significant result, this will need about 10 times as many people as we needed for our first trial, but the good news is that everyone gets treated,” said Prof Burn.

For more information:
  • Abstract no: 6000, Gastro-intestinal malignancies, colorectal cancer session, Monday 11.00 hrs CEST (Hall 2)

Also read these PubMed abstracts:

Monday, August 31, 2009

New Assessment Quantifies Risks and Benefits of Warfarin Treatment for Atrial Fibrillation

Warfarin (an oral anticoagulant) therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation - the most common type of significant heart rhythm disorder - appears to be most beneficial for the oldest patients, for those who have had a prior stroke and for patients with multiple risk factors for stroke, according to a new study by Kaiser Permanente and Massachusetts General Hospital researchers.

This comparative effectiveness research study, among the first and largest to quantify warfarin's net clinical benefit - how much a treatment's potential benefits outweigh its risks - in the usual clinical care of patients with atrial fibrillation, appears in the September 1 issue of The Annals of Internal Medicine.

As part of the ongoing ATRIA (AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors In Atrial Fibrillation) study, researchers followed 13,559 adults with atrial fibrillation treated within Kaiser Permanente of Northern California from 1996 to 2003. To evaluate the risks and benefits of warfarin treatment and give patients and physicians quantitative guidance in making therapeutic decisions, the researchers analyzed rates of the two most significant adverse events associated with warfarin therapy - ischemic stroke, the type produced by arterial blockage, and intracranial hemorrhage, bleeding within and around the brain. In patients who did and did not take warfarin, the investigators balanced the reduction in ischemic stroke attributable to treatment against the increase in intracranial bleeding associated with warfarin. Since intracranial hemorrhages usually have worse outcomes than ischemic strokes, bleeding events were given greater weight in the comparison.

While warfarin therapy benefited most atrial fibrillation patients, the balance of benefits over risks was greatest in those at highest risk of stroke - those with multiple risk factors, those with a history of stroke and the oldest patients. The benefits of treatment increased dramatically with age, with no clear benefit in the average patient younger than 65 but a reduction of more than two strokes per 100 patients in those 85 and older.

Occurring when the upper chambers of the heart quiver instead of contract smoothly, atrial fibrillation affects more than 2.3 million Americans. Because the heart rhythm disturbance promotes the formation of blood clots, which can travel to the brain and block an artery, atrial fibrillation increases the risk of stroke fivefold. The condition is highly age-dependent and affects 10 percent of those over age 80.

Researchers have long known that warfarin is effective in preventing such strokes, but the treatment can be difficult to control and often leads to hemorrhages. In fact, warfarin is associated with the most emergency admissions for drug-related adverse reactions, according to the researchers. Balancing the benefits of warfarin against its most severe risks is critical to making the best therapeutic decisions for individual atrial fibrillation patients, explains the study's senior author Alan S. Go, MD, Director of the Comprehensive Clinical Research Unit at the Kaiser Permanente Division of Research in Oakland, CA

Daniel Singer, MD, of the Massachusetts General Hospital Clinical Epidemiology Unit, the report's lead author, adds, "This comparative effectiveness study gives us more information about which atrial fibrillation patients are most likely to benefit from carefully administered warfarin therapy." He explains that, by assessing warfarin within a "real world" practice setting, the study provides a more contemporary assessment of the therapy's overall effects than do older clinical studies.

Go explains that Kaiser Permanente physicians in Northern California partner with pharmacist-run anticoagulation clinics to provide thorough and nimble administration and careful monitoring of warfarin therapy for atrial fibrillation patients. This allows for delivery of high-quality anticoagulation therapy through frequent testing and appropriate dose adjustment to account for changes in diet, medications and clinical status that may impact the therapy's narrow therapeutic window.

Singer adds, "One of our distinctive findings is that stroke risk continues to increase in patients age 85 and older and that warfarin provides substantial net protection for these elderly patients. A caution is that all these patients were presumably judged by their physicians to be reasonable candidates for warfarin therapy, so these results do not automatically apply to all elderly atrial fibrillation patients."

Funding for the study was provided by the National Institute on Aging, the National Heart, Lung. Blood Institute and the Eliot B. and Edith C. Shoolman fund of the Massachusetts General Hospital.