CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home »

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 26 No. 10
Pages: 1  2  
Previous
REVIEW ARTICLE 

Targeted Therapy: Its Status and Promise in Selected Solid Tumors Part I

Areas of Major Impact

By Jennifer Wu, MD1, Sasha O. Joseph, MD1,2 Franco M. Muggia, MD1 | October 23, 2012
1Division of Hematology and Oncology, New York University (NYU) School of Medicine, New York, New York, 2 Thoracic Oncology Laboratory, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, NYU School of Medicine

Hepatocellular Carcinoma

1. What is the underlying tumor biology that is being targeted?

Systemic therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) had left behind a long record of negative phase III trials until the landmark placebo-controlled Sorafenib(Drug information on sorafenib) Hepatocellular Carcinoma Assessment Randomized Protocol (SHARP) trial demonstrated an impact of sorafenib on survival.[22] Advances in the imaging studies used in both the diagnosis and therapy of HCC had identified the development of the typical hypervascularity of HCC in the arterial phase, which is followed by rapid washout in the venous phase on a contrast-enhanced CT scan of the liver on a cirrhotic background. Such findings not only spurred the use of local measures against these lesions, but also gave rise to trials targeting tumor angiogenesis. The tumor itself carries frequent mutations in many tumor suppressor genes throughout its development and progression; these, coupled with the frequently compromised liver function (varying with the etiology of the liver disease), account for HCC’s notorious chemotherapy resistance. In fact, as the tumor progresses and acquires adverse prognostic features, such as vascular invasion and portal vein thrombosis, angiogenesis continues to play a critical role in metastasis and invasion. VEGF-A is one of the most potent angiogenetic factors in HCC; consequently, inhibition of VEGF-A is a key targeted therapy in HCC. In addition, basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) is also over expressed in HCC, and it may, along with VEGF-A, further enhance angiogenesis.[23,24] There are at least two other types of growth factor that play an important role in angiogenesis in HCC: PDGF, which stimulates formation of blood vessels, and angiopoietins, which modulate blood vessel vascularity to enhance nutrient delivery to tumor cells.[25] In addition to contributing to angiogenesis, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) may also be important to the growth and metastasis of some HCCs: EGFR activation leads to activation of the downstream RAF/extracellular signal–regulated kinase (ERK) pathway and the PI3K/mTOR pathway. The mTOR pathway is a crucial part of hepatocyte malignant transformation into HCC.[26] Aberrant expression of mTOR has been demonstrated in up to 50% of HCC tissues,[27] and when mTOR becomes constitutively activated, it is associated with activation of the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axis and upregulation of the PI3K pathway.[28] The mTOR pathway has become one of the therapeutic targets in HCC clinical trials. Raf kinase is also upregulated in HCC, representing another rational target for HCC treatment. Another possible therapeutic target—c-MET—the sole receptor of hepatocyte growth factor, is overexpressed in up to 49% of HCCs, and is associated with worse overall survival.[29]

2. How ‘targeted’ are the so-called ‘targeted drugs’?

In 2006, a new stage in HCC treatment unfolded when sorafenib improved overall survival in patients with unresectable HCC. Sorafenib is the first and only agent in the history of HCC therapy that has demonstrated an overall survival benefit; this targeted treatment—which inhibits VEGF-2, VEGF-3, PDGFR, and Raf kinases—has transformed the landscape of HCC treatment. Subsequent phase II studies using bevacizumab(Drug information on bevacizumab) and erlotinib (Tarceva; a TKI targeting EGFR) in HCC have shown promise with regard to disease stabilization and PFS. Current studies of a PI3K inhibitor and mTOR inhibitors are ongoing, making treatment of HCC the prototype for targeted therapy.

3. Is the targeted therapy also suitable for immunomodulation and/or immunoconjugation?

(MORE: Improving Harmonious Precision)

Similar to RCC, HCC is a tumor with potential to respond to immunomodulation, and there are case reports of spontaneous regression. Immune therapy has figured prominently in past HCC treatments: IFN was tested as a component of combination therapy for HCC (IFN, cisplatin, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil(Drug information on fluorouracil) [5-FU]), but high response rates did not confer an overall survival benefit. New studies are focusing on glypican-3, a member of the proteoglycan family that is found on the surface of HCC cells, and which is not present in nonmalignant tissue.[30] A phase I study in patients with advanced HCC used a peptide vaccine against glypican-3; the study demonstrated that patients with a cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte frequency (percentage of both glypican-3 peptide+ and CD8+ T cells pre- and post-vaccination) of ≥ 50 had longer overall survival than those whose cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte frequency did not reach 50.[31] There is potential interest in immunotherapy for the treatment of HCC because of the possibly lesser risk of incurring toxicities in the setting of precarious liver dysfunction.

4. In what way does the targeted therapy constitute a meaningful improvement over chemotherapy?

The key feature of targeted therapy in HCC has been the demonstration that it can offer clear survival advantages to patients undergoing treatment. With sorafenib, for the first time, patients with limited options because of known liver disease have been able to experience clinical benefit. This experience highlights the inadequacies of response rate as a reflection of benefit for patients with this disease. In fact, lack of objective tumor regression should not diminish our confidence in the efficacy of targeted therapy. By contrast, while chemotherapy drug regimens could claim higher response rates, they all failed to prolong overall survival in HCC patients.

Malignant Melanoma

1. What is the underlying tumor biology that is being targeted?

Other than the known propensity of melanoma to accelerate its growth years after a latent stage, virtually little information of much therapeutic use had been assembled in at least three decades. Two breakthroughs initiated a cascade of events leading to successful clinical applications that were covered by both The New York Times and the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in 2010.

One powerful lead was related to a BRAF mutation. BRAF, a member of the MAP kinase signaling pathway, is involved in cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. Up to 60% of melanomas have a V600 mutation in BRAF, leaving the kinase in a constitutively active form.[32] Identification of this pathway as one that confers a growth advantage, leading to accelerated growth in the presence of additional mutations, was demonstrated in mouse models [33].

TABLE 2

Targeted Monoclonal Antibodies With Major Impact

Another approach—trying to harness immunity against tumors—led to investigation of the importance of the cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) receptor on T cells. Antibodies to CTLA-4 prevent the negative regulation of the T-cell interactions with antigen-presenting cells. Antigen-presenting cells use CD-28 to help bind T cells while presenting peptide fregments to T cells during this positive interaction. CTLA-4 expression then becomes upregulated on the T-cell surface, and CTLA-4 binds B7 on tumor cells, which bears the antigen more tightly than CD-28 (Table 2), thereby effectively slowing the activated immune system, acting in a manner similar to that of a brake. The immunologic consequence of removing the “brake” that CTLA-4 puts on the immune system is the unleashing of T-cell–mediated immunity; this stimulation was further shown to be clinically relevant. The intense interest emanating from the unprecedented clinical successes that followed these discoveries has resulted in further inquiries into the tumor biology of melanoma and in additional developments, such as the simultaneous use of B-raf and MEK inhibitors.[34]

2. How ‘targeted’ are the so-called ‘targeted drugs’?

Until the introduction of targeted therapy with ipilimumab (Yervoy; an antibody against CTLA-4) and vemurafenib (Zelboraf, a B-raf inhibitor), the treatment of malignant melanoma in the adjuvant setting was limited to IFN—and in the metastatic setting to high-dose IL-2, radiation, and cytotoxic chemotherapy. All of these therapies, even though some were “targeted,” had minimal impact on overall survival.

Vemurafenib is an extremely potent and specific inhibitor of the BRAF V600E activating mutation, providing an effective blockade of the downstream MAP kinase pathway. This compound, introduced by Plexxikon, as well as the similarly targeted drug by GlaxoSmithKline (dabrafenib), represent a remarkably successful feat in drug development. Compared to dacarbazine(Drug information on dacarbazine), vemurafenib increased 6-month overall survival: 84% of vemurafenib-treated patients survived compared with 64% of patients treated with dacarbazine.[35] Of interest, future directions of therapy include other methods of blockading the MAP kinase pathway, such as with new inhibitors of MEK.[36] Studies are underway to investigate whether dual blockade of both B-raf and MEK can overcome acquired resistance to B-raf inhibition.

Ipilimumab does not directly target melanoma; instead, by targeting CTLA-4, it prevents application of the “brake” and allows the body’s immune system to sustain an attack on malignant cells. At the same time, it allows the immune system to attack a number of other tissues—a cause of toxic manifestations (and paradoxically an indication of “non-specific targeting”). Compared with administration of a gp100 vaccine alone, ipilimumab increased overall survival in metastatic melanoma by close to 5 months.[37] While this effect is not specifically limited to melanoma, malignant melanoma is the first tumor in which deregulating the immune system has proven effective at curbing malignant cell growth. In a similar manner, more recent data have shown that curbing the negative regulation of T cells by inhibiting PD-1 or the PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) may also improve the cytotoxic attack of T cells on a number of malignant cells, including melanoma cells.[38,39]

3. Is the targeted therapy also suitable for immunomodulation and/or immunoconjugation?

Immunomodulation has a place in the treatment of malignant melanoma, and has been proven effective with the advent of CTLA-1 and PD-1 inhibition. Ipilimumab is likely to be a prototype for the harnessing of the immune system to target malignancies. Allowing T cells to act without functional inhibition leads to improvements in overall survival in patients with melanoma.

4. In what way does the targeted therapy constitute a meaningful improvement over chemotherapy?

For a decade, cytotoxic chemotherapy had minimal benefit in the treatment of melanoma. Even the combination of chemotherapy and nonspecific immunotherapy proved futile. BRAF and MEK inhibition have shown their impressive power in halting disease progression. Vemurafenib has been proven to be more effective in the treatment of this disease than the standard cytotoxic agent, dacarbazine. Furthermore, with research in melanoma focusing squarely on targeting the MAP kinase pathway and harnessing the immune system to combat the disease, it is likely that we have seen the end of cytotoxic chemotherapy use for melanoma. In malignant melanoma, targeted therapy is the only meaningful treatment option currently available.

GIST and Other Sarcomas

We include sarcomas as a “major impact area” because even the notoriously chemo-resistant tumors that are prevalent in adults are increasingly being reclassified based on molecular profiling, leading to totally new therapeutic paradigms. GIST was the initial major success of targeted therapy—once a potent inhibitor of an activated tyrosine kinase such as imatinib(Drug information on imatinib) was identified in laboratory studies[40] and tried in a patient with advanced GIST while the drug was being tested as an inhibitor of BCR/ABL in chronic myeloid leukemia. GIST became the prototype for a notoriously chemo-resistant sarcoma that yielded to a targeted agent; the approach that led to imatinib’s success in GIST was subsequently extended to other c-kit–activating mutations. Sunitinib, sorafenib, and more recently regorafenib[41] have shown efficacy in GIST imatinib failures—regorafenib presumably by successfully targeting PDGFR-A as well as KIT, which are implicated in GIST growth and imatinib resistance.[42] In addition, other tumors of mesenchymal origin, such as dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, have been shown to be responsive to imatinib because their growth is in part driven by PDGFR.[43] A number of sarcoma subtypes have been defined by chromosomal translocations coding for chimeric oncoproteins that promote abnormal transcription; typical translocations have been described in synovial sarcoma, epithelioid sarcoma, and Ewing sarcoma. Ewing sarcoma is associated with the rearrangement of the EWS gene, which results in IGF-1 or IGF-2 hyperactivation and susceptibility to inhibitors of the IGF pathway.[44] Alveolar soft part sarcoma’s translocation results in a fusion protein that is associated with MET autophosphorylation and activation of downstream pathways, which promote growth and angiogenesis; it has been successfully targeted by sunitinib, as well as other drugs that inhibit VEGFR-1.[45,46] The growth of giant-cell tumors is mediated by RANK-ligand (RANKL)-induced osteoclast activation; denosumab (Xgeva), an inhibitor of RANKL, is able to reverse this tumor’s locally aggressive behavior.[47] The perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComas) and related lymphangioleiomyomatosis occur as part of tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), in which mutations in TSC1 or TSC2 result in defective negative regulation of mTOR; treatment with rapalogs has been effective.[48] Trabectedin (Yondelis) is a marine product that inhibits transcription-coupled DNA repair, leading to responses in myxoid liposarcoma,[49] a tumor with a unique chromosomal rearrangement that also confers increased sensitivity to ifosfamide(Drug information on ifosfamide) and doxorubicin(Drug information on doxorubicin).[50] Pazopanib has recently been approved as a systemic treatment for the notoriously drug-resistant leiomyosarcomas.[51] Finally, paclitaxel—as well as anti-angiogenic strategies—although disappointing in many forms of sarcoma,[52] has activity against angiosarcomas.[53]

Considered in perspective, the systemic treatment of sarcomas had changed little since the landmark introductions of doxorubicin and ifosfamide for soft-tissue sarcomas and cisplatin(Drug information on cisplatin) for bone sarcomas. It is now mandatory to consider specific therapeutic targets when a tumor of mesenchymal origin requiring systemic therapy is first identified.

Financial Disclosure: Dr. Muggia has served on safety data monitoring committees for Bayer, Lilly, Pfizer, and Roche. Dr. Wu and Dr. Joseph have no significant financial interest or other relationship with the manufacturers of any products or providers of any service mentined in this article.

Pages: 1  2  
Previous
 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.

Targeted Therapy: Its Status and Promise

Targeted Therapy: Its Status and Promise in Selected Solid Tumors Part I

Targeted Therapy: Its Status and Promise in Selected Solid Tumors Part II

Expert Perspectives on this case report

Targeted Therapy for Cancer: Asking the Right Questions

Improving Harmonious Precision





REFERENCES

1. DeVita VT, Jr. Rosenberg SA. Two hundred years of cancer research. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2207-14.

2. Tuma RS. Strides in melanoma announced: maximizing value comes next. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:997-9.

3. Schilsky RL. Personalizing cancer care: American Society of Clinical Oncology presidential address 2009. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3725-30.

4. Schilsky RL. Personalized medicine in oncology: the future is now. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010;9:363-6.

5. O'Leary J, Muggia FM. Camptothecins: a review of their development and schedules of administration. Eur J Cancer. 1998;34:1500-8.

6. Kaelin WG, Jr. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein and clear cell renal carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:680s-84s.

7. George CM, Vogelzang NJ, Rini BI, et al. A phase II trial of weekly intravenous gemcitabine and cisplatin with continuous infusion fluorouracil in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2002;
13:116-20.

8. Porta C, Zimatore M, Imarisio I, et al. Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in the treatment of patients with immunotherapy-resistant advanced renal cell carcinoma: final results of a single-institution phase II study. Cancer. 2004;100:2132-8.

9. Van Veldhuizen PJ, Faulkner JR, Lara PN, Jr, et al. A phase II study of flavopiridol in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: results of Southwest Oncology Group Trial 0109. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2005;56:39-45.

10. Maher ER. Von Hippel-Lindau disease. Curr Mol Med. 2004;4:833-42.

11. Milella M, Felici A. Biology of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Cancer. 2011;2:369-73.

12. Coppin C. Everolimus: the first approved product for patients with advanced renal cell cancer after sunitinib and/or sorafenib. Biologics. 2010;4:91-101.

13. Lane HA, Wood JM, McSheehy PM, et al. mTOR inhibitor RAD001 (everolimus) has antiangiogenic/vascular properties distinct from a VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:1612-22.

14. Motzer RJ, Hutson TE, Tomczak P, et al. Sunitinib versus interferon alfa in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:115-24.

15. Escudier B, Eisen T, Stadler WM, et al. Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:125-34.

16. Sternberg CN, Davis ID, Mardiak J, et al. Pazopanib in locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma: results of a randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1061-8.

17. Rini BI, Halabi S, Rosenberg JE, et al. Phase III trial of bevacizumab plus interferon alfa versus interferon alfa monotherapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: final results of CALGB 90206. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2137-43.

18. Rini BI, Escudier B, Tomczak P, et al. Comparative effectiveness of axitinib versus sorafenib in advanced renal cell carcinoma (AXIS): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2011;378:1931-9.

19. Motzer RJ, Nosov D, Eisen T, et al; and the TIVO-1 Study Group. Tivozanib versus sorafenib as initial targeted therapy for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: Results from a Phase III randomized, open-label, multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(Suppl):abstr 4501.

20. Hudes G, Carducci M, Tomczak P, et al. Temsirolimus, interferon alfa, or both for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2271-81.

21. Motzer RJ, Escudier B, Oudard S, et al. Efficacy of everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Lancet. 2008;372:449-56.

22. Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V, et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:378-90.

23. Yoshiji H, Kuriyama S, Yoshii J, et al. Synergistic effect of basic fibroblast growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor in murine hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2002;35:834-42.

24. Pang RW, Poon RT. From molecular biology to targeted therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: the future is now. Oncology. 2007;72(Suppl 1):30-44.

25. Tanaka S, Mori M, Sakamoto Y, et al. Biologic significance of angiopoietin-2 expression in human hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Invest. 1999;103:341-5.

26. Villafuerte BC, Goldstein S, Robertson DG, et al. Nutrition and somatomedin XXIX. Molecular regulation of IGFBP-1 in hepatocyte primary culture. Diabetes. 1992;41:835-42.

27. Villanueva A, Chiang DY, Newell P, et al. Pivotal role of mTOR signaling in hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2008;135:1972-83, 83 e1-11.

28. Wu J, Zhu AX. Targeting insulin-like growth factor axis in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hematol Oncol. 2011;4:30.

29. Ueki T, Fujimoto J, Suzuki T, et al. Expression of hepatocyte growth factor and its receptor, the c-met proto-oncogene, in hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 1997;25:619-23.

30. Anatelli F, Chuang ST, Yang XJ Wang HL. Value of glypican 3 immunostaining in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma on needle biopsy. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;130:219-23.

31. Sawada Y, Yoshikawa T, Nobuoka D, et al. Phase I trial of a glypican-3-derived peptide vaccine for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: immunologic evidence and potential for improving overall survival. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:3686-96.

32. Flaherty KT, Puzanov I, Kim KB, et al. Inhibition of mutated, activated BRAF in metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:809-19.

33. Dankort D, Filenova E, Collado M, et al. A new mouse model to explore the initiation, progression, and therapy of BRAFV600E-induced lung tumors. Genes Dev. 2007;21:379-84.

34. Sausville EA. Promises from trametinib in RAF active tumors. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:171-2.

35. Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, et al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med. 2011;
364:2507-16.

36. Flaherty KT, Robert C, Hersey P, et al. Improved survival with MEK inhibition in BRAF-mutated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:107-14.

37. Hodi FS, O'Day SJ, McDermott DF, et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:711-23.

38. Topalian SL, Hodi FS, Brahmer JR, et al. Safety, activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2443-54.

39. Brahmer JR, Tykodi SS, Chow LQ, et al. Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2455-65.

40. Druker BJ, Guilhot F, O'Brien SG, et al. Five-year follow-up of patients receiving imatinib for chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2408-17.

41. George S, Wang Q, Heinrich MC, et al. Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in patients with metastatic and/or unresectable GI stromal tumor after failure of imatinib and sunitinib: a multicenter phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2401-7.

42. Bosbach B, Deshpande S, Rossi F, et al. Imatinib resistance and microcytic erythrocytosis in a KitV558{Delta};T669I/+ gatekeeper-mutant mouse model of gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:E2276-83.

43. Komdeur R, Hoekstra HJ, Molenaar WM, et al. Clinicopathologic assessment of postradiation sarcomas: KIT as a potential treatment target. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:2926-32.

44. Arnaldez FI, Helman LJ. Targeting the insulin growth factor receptor 1. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2012;26:527-42, vii-viii.

45. Vistica DT, Hollingshead M, Borgel SD, et al. Therapeutic vulnerability of an in vivo model of alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) to antiangiogenic therapy. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2009;31:561-70.

46. Stacchiotti S, Negri T, Zaffaroni N, et al. Sunitinib in advanced alveolar soft part sarcoma: evidence of a direct antitumor effect. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1682-90.

47. Branstetter DG, Nelson SD, Manivel JC, et al. Denosumab induces tumor reduction and bone formation in patients with giant-cell tumor of bone. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:4415-24.

48. Wagner AJ, Malinowska-Kolodziej I, Morgan JA, et al. Clinical activity of mTOR inhibition with sirolimus in malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumors: targeting the pathogenic activation of mTORC1 in tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:835-40.

49. Cesne AL, Cresta S, Maki RG, et al. A retrospective analysis of antitumour activity with trabectedin in translocation-related sarcomas. Eur J Cancer. 2012; Jun 28 [Epub ahead of print].

50. Katz D, Boonsirikamchai P, Choi H, et al. Efficacy of first-line doxorubicin and ifosfamide in myxoid liposarcoma. Clin Sarcoma Res. 2012;2:2.

51. Sleijfer S, Ray-Coquard I, Papai Z, et al. Pazopanib, a multikinase angiogenesis inhibitor, in patients with relapsed or refractory advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a phase II study from the European organisation for research and treatment of cancer-soft tissue and bone sarcoma group (EORTC study 62043). J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3126-32.

52. Casper ES, Waltzman RJ, Schwartz GK, et al. Phase II trial of paclitaxel in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma. Cancer Invest. 1998;16:442-6.

53. Park MS, Ravi V, Araujo DM. Inhibiting the VEGF-VEGFR pathway in angiosarcoma, epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, and hemangiopericytoma/solitary fibrous tumor. Curr Opin Oncol. 2010;22:351-5.


 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
IMAGE IQ

Lower Back Pain in an Elderly Man With a History of Localized Prostate Cancer
James B. Yu, MD1 , May 17, 2013

A 70-year-old man with a history of localized prostate cancer treated with whole-pelvis radiation therapy with a boost to the prostate, in conjunction with androgen deprivation therapy 7 years prior, presented with lower back pain. A bone scan revealed an area of activity in the sacrum. What is the most likely diagnosis?

More Image IQs 

 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Primary Care Can't Thrive Without Nurse Practitioners
Courtney H. Lyder, ND,  May 17, 2013
With a projected shortfall of primary-care physicians, it's time for alternate solutions to patient care. Nurse practitioners are one logical remedy.
VWhat Physicians Can Learn from the Allscripts EHR Lawsuit
Marisa Torrieri,  May 16, 2013
Lawsuit prompts question: What should physicians do to ensure they end up with a great EHR instead of buyer’s remorse?
Eight Ways ICD-9 Will Still Matter to Medical Practices
Brenda Edwards, CPC,  May 15, 2013
What should your medical practice do with your ICD-9-CM book after October 1, 2014? Keep it.
Seven Ways Technology Can Speed Up Patient Collections
Cheyenne Brinson,  May 15, 2013
Failing to adopt widely available billing and collections technology can cost medical practices big. Here's how to do it right.
Four Reasons Private Medical Practice is Becoming Extinct
Carol Stryker,  May 15, 2013
It’s becoming increasingly difficult for private medical practices to thrive. Here’s what’s driving the trend toward consolidation.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Slide Show: Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck
  • Skin Lesions
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • ONS: Understanding Spirituality and How It Can Be Used to Help Patients
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • Palliative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Bone Metastases Improves Quality of Life
  • Staying Fit Could Ward Off Lung and Colorectal Cancer for Middle-Age Men
  • Obesity Impairs Efficacy of L-Asparaginase in Leukemia Treatment
  • New AUA Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Screening
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Financial Toxicity, Part II: How Can We Help With the Burden of Treatment-Related Costs?
  • Patient Quality of Life Endpoints in Oncology Trials, Part II
  • Who's Coding Whom?
  • “How Do I Say This Nicely? Your Oncologist Wasn't Following Guidelines”
  • Preventing Exposure to Hazardous Drugs
  • Cancer Metabolism as a Therapeutic Target
  • Study: Cholesterol Drugs Reduced Risk of Prostate Cancer Death
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • ONS: Safe Handling of Chemotherapy
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter



CancerNetwork on Facebook

CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy