1 / 45

2012 GU Cancers Symposium

2012 GU Cancers Symposium . San Francisco, CA February 2-4, 2012. Jerry M. Maniate MD, M.Ed, FRCPC Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine University of Toronto Dr. H. James Watt Hematology/Oncology Clinic Service of Hematology/Oncology Director of Medical Education

tanuja
Télécharger la présentation

2012 GU Cancers Symposium

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 2012 GU Cancers Symposium • San Francisco, CA • February 2-4, 2012 Jerry M. Maniate MD, M.Ed, FRCPC Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine University of Toronto Dr. H. James Watt Hematology/Oncology Clinic Service of Hematology/Oncology Director of Medical Education St. Joseph’s Health Centre

  2. Objectives • In the next 30 minutes...

  3. Outline • Prostate Cancer • Bone Targeted Therapy • Renal Cell Cancer

  4. Highlights of GUCA Symposium • 2500 attendees • 284 Prostate cancer abstracts • 136 Renal cell carcinoma abstracts

  5. Novel Targets & Novel Agents

  6. MDV3100 • Specific inhibitor of androgen receptor • No known effect on androgen production • Preclinical: anti-proliferative activity on prostate cancer cells that harbour amplification of AR Scher, Lancet 2010; 375: 1437 Scher, JCO, March 1, 2006

  7. MDV3100 • Progression measured as rising PSA • Improved OS post-docetaxel • Median OS: 18.4 mths vs. • Not hormone resistant but rather castrate resistant due to drive of AR signaling Scher, Lancet 2010; 375: 1437 Scher, JCO, March 1, 2006

  8. Post-chemotherapy: failed docetaxel MDV3100 160 mg po OD Placebo Primary EP: Overall Survival Secondary EP: Radiographic PFS Time to first SRE Time to PSA progression Circulating tumour cell count conversion rate AFFIRM Study. Scher HI et al. JCO 30, 2012 (suppl 5; abstract LBA1)

  9. AFFIRM Study • N = 1199 pts (800 vs. 399) • Balanced demographics / disease characteristics • 520 death events reached • Independent Drug Monitoring Committee (IDMC) concluded that the trial be stopped, unblinded and that the patients on placebo be offered the test agent

  10. Post-chemotherapy: failed docetaxel MDV3100 160 mg po OD Placebo 18.4 mths 13.6 mths p<0.001 Median OS PFS Time to PSA progression Safety TO FOLLOW AFFIRM Study. Scher HI et al. JCO 30, 2012 (suppl 5; abstract LBA1)

  11. AFFIRM Study • Survival benefit observed across subgroups vs. placebo • Median duration of Tx: 8.3 vs. 3.0 mths • Tumour response on imaging • No difference in adverse events • No myelosuppression • 0.6% had seizures (5 pts: 2 with brain mets, 2 had lidocaine for biopsies)

  12. PREVAIL Study • Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic men with metastatic PrCa who are chemotherapy naive

  13. Bone Targeted Therapy

  14. Radium-223 Chloride • ALSYMPCA Study

  15. ALSYMPCA Study • Radium-223 acts as a calcium mimic • Integrated into bone • Alpha emitter that provides localized effect • Induces dsDNA breaks in adjacent tumour cells • Short penetration • Phase 2: Nilsson, Lancet Onco GUCA 2012, Abstract 8

  16. ALSYMPCA Study • Phase 3: post-docetaxel and docetaxel ineligible • BSC ± Radium-223 • 6 injections at 4-wk intervals • N = 541 (radium) vs. 268 (placebo) • No cytotoxic chemotherapy • Primary EP: OS • Secondary EP: QoL, safety

  17. ALSYMPCA Study • Planned interim analysis at 320 deaths • Balanced baseline characteristics • Results: • OS: 14.0 mths vs. 11 mths (stat sig) • No routine imaging unlike DEN & Zometa studies

  18. ALSYMPCA Study • SRE: include spinal cord compression, pathologic fractures • Reduced risk for SCC with Radium-223 vs. placebo • A/E: • Modest increase in neutropenia but only 2% • Very well tolerated

  19. Bone Protection in MetCRPC • Can we prolong bone metastases free survival? • Fracture prevention? • Should we place patients on bone protective agent? • Zoledronate vs. Denosumab? • What is the optimal scheduling? • Individualization of options?

  20. Bone Protection in MetCRPC • Considerations for individualization: • Poor dentition • Convenience: IV vs. SC • Renal dysfunction • Side effects • Cost and co-payments • Are these agents necessary when other agents are being used?

  21. Renal Cell Carcinoma

  22. RCC in the Vulnerable Patient • Comorbidity Scores

  23. RCC & Comorbidity Scores • Accounting for comorbidities is important for clinical prognosis • SEER Registry (1995- 2007 data) • 1155 people with T1a N0 M0, well-differentiated • At 10 years: • 4% mortality for RCC causes • 51% from non-RCC causes

  24. Competing Risks • What diseases did the patient have before the cancer diagnosis? • Which ones are relevant?

  25. Charlson Comorbidity Index • Developed by fitting a statistical model to evaluate predictors of mortality

  26. Developed by fitting a statistical model to evaluate predictors of mortality • As CCI score increases, the mortality rate increases

  27. Charlson Comorbidity Index • 203 older pts with cancer • Little or no correlation between comorbidty (CCI or Cumulative Illness Rating Scale - Geriatrics) and functional status (ECOG or ADLs) • An assessment of comorbid medical conditions can provide information that is independent of patient’s functional status. Thus need to assess both. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(4):1582

  28. Charlson Comorbidity Index • CAUTIONS: • **Other measures may be more appropriate • Nomograms are statistical models that can be used to predict outcomes, and are visual representations of the model • Be careful of extrapolation to unusual values

  29. Metastatic RCC • When to treat? • What are the deciding factors for when to start systemic therapy?

  30. Metastatic RCC: Goal • Delay as long as possible a patient from reaching a lethal tumour burden while maintaining QoL • RCC is an inherently diverse disease with a diverse biology

  31. Who can we observe? • Good performance status • Low volume • Slow growing • Asymptomatic

  32. When should we start? • Increased pace of disease • New organ sites • Symptoms from disease • MD / patient anxiety

  33. Therapy in mRCC • Advantages: • Reduction in tumour burden • Delay worsening of disease • Relatively convenient, oral therapy • Disadvantages: • Chronic therapy • Chronic toxicity

  34. Sunitinib in Elderly Pts with mRCC • Pooled data analysis of 1059 pts • 65% (689 pts): Sunitinib 50 mg/d (4wks on, 2wks off) • 35% (370 pts): continuous OD dosing • 1st line setting: 74% (783 pts) • 2nd line setting: 26% (276 pts) Hutson TE et al. J Clin Oncol. 29: 2011 (suppl; abstract 4604)

  35. Sunitinib in Elderly Pts with mRCC • Median PFS: 9.0 vs. 10.9 mths (p=0.0830) • Median OS: 23.3 vs. 23.7 mths (p=0.5441) • No difference when age taken • Overall tolerability is similar • In younger pts: increased HFS, chest pain Hutson TE et al. J Clin Oncol. 29: 2011 (suppl; abstract 4604)

  36. Ph.3 AXIS Trial for mRCC • What is the effect of prior first-line treatment duration and axitinib dose titration on axitinib efficacy? • Axitinib: potent and selective 2nd-gen VEGFR-I (VEGFR-1, -2, and -3) Rini BI et al. GUCA Symp 2012; abstract 354

  37. Axitinib • Potent and selective second-generation inhibitor of VEGFR-1, -2, and -3 • If no toxicity > grade 2 and BP <150/90 mmHg without anti-HTN meds for >2 wks ➜ increase axitinib to 7mg po BID and then to 10 mg po BID Rini BI et al. GUCA Symp 2012; abstract 354

  38. AXIS Trial Second Line mRCC (clear cell) Axitinib 5 mg po BID Sorafenib 400 mg po BID 6.7 mths 4.7 mths Median PFS p<0.0001 6.6 mths At least one total daily dose > 10mg N =132 pts 8.3 mths At least one total daily dose ≤ 10mg N = 227 pts Rini BI et al. GUCA Symp 2012; abstract 354

  39. AXIS Trial Second Line mRCC (clear cell) Axitinib 5 mg po BID Sorafenib 400 mg po BID 6.7 mths 4.7 mths Median PFS p<0.0001 N =194 pts (53.7%) N =195 pts (53.9%) Prior Sunitinib ≥9mths 6.3 mths Prior Sunitinib <9mths 4.5 mths Rini BI et al. GUCA Symp 2012; abstract 354

  40. Foretinib • Oral multi-kinase inhibitor targeting MET, VEGF, RON, AXL and TIE-2 receptors • Activating mutations and/or amplifications in MET in papillary RCC Choueiri TK et al. GUCA Symp 2012; abstract 355

  41. Locally adv. or met papillary RCC Intermittent arm Foretinib 240 mg/d on day 1-5 of every 14 days 37 pts Daily dose arm Foretinib 80 mg/d 37 pts ORR 13.5% PFS 9.3 mths 1-yr OS 70% Median OS not reached Choueiri TK et al. GUCA Symp 2012; abstract 355

  42. Locally adv. or met papillary RCC Intermittent arm Foretinib 240 mg/d on day 1-5 of every 14 days 37 pts Daily dose arm Foretinib 80 mg/d 37 pts ORR 13.5% PFS 9.3 mths 1-yr OS 70% Median OS not reached Choueiri TK et al. GUCA Symp 2012; abstract 355

  43. Foretinib: Toxicity • Grade 3/4: • Fatigue 6.8% • HTN 50% • Diarrhea 6.8% • Non-fatal pulmonary embolism: 11% • No sig diff between the 2 cohorts in efficacy or safety

  44. Summary • Prostate Cancer • Bone Targeted Therapy • Renal Cell Cancer

  45. Questions • maniaj@stjoe.on.ca

More Related