Explore the vast range of titles available.

Novel targeted therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer are needed to personalize treatments by guiding specific biomarkers selected on the genetic profile of patients. RAS and BRAF inhibitors have been developed for patients who become unresponsive to standard therapies. Sotorasib and adagrasib showed promising results in phase I/II basket trial and a phase III trial was planned with a combination of these RAS inhibitors and anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. Encorafenib and binimetinib were administered in phase II clinical trials for BRAF mutated patients. Pembrolizumab is now recommended in patients exhibiting microsatellite instability. Larotrectinib and entrectinib showed a fast and durable response with few and reversible adverse events in cases with NTRK fusions. Trastuzumab and trastuzumab deruxtecan exhibited promising and durable activity in HER-2-positive patients. In this review, the reasons for an extension of the molecular profile of patients were assessed and placed in the context of the advancements in the understanding of genetics. We highlight the differential effect of new targeted therapies through an ever-deeper characterization of tumor tissue. An overview of ongoing clinical trials is also provided.

Appendiceal tumors (ATs) are classified by the World Health Organization's (WHO) 5th edition of their categorization of digestive system tumors into four subtypes: mucinous neoplasms, adenocarcinomas, serrated lesions, polyps, and neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). Due to their rarity and the lack of data from randomized controlled studies, ATs can be challenging to differentiate in medical practice. Specimens obtained during appendectomies for clinically acute appendicitis typically contain ATs. Most ATs in the European population affect women over 50 years. Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are the most common histological type, comprising 54.6%, followed by cystic, mucinous, and serous neoplasms (26.7%) and adenocarcinoma not otherwise defined (NOS) (18.6%). Most findings of ATs on pathologic investigation are benign lesions or small NENs that do not require additional treatment. The development of pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP), a complicated situation of peritoneal carcinomatosis, may result from the presence of appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (AMN). Over the past few decades, multimodal treatment for abdominal cancers has advanced; however, ATs' clinical diagnosis and management are still debated. This review aims to outline the diagnostic options, molecular-based diagnosis, staging, treatment, and prognostic markers related to ATs.

[LANGUAGE= \"English\"] Introduction Age is a major cancer risk factor, and it is associated with poor prognosis [1-2]. The exciting revolution of development of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) in Oncology raises high expectations for our elder patients. Indeed, ICIs have been approved for melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, renal cell cancer and others type of malignancy [3-8]. Immunotherapy has encountered great results in the treatment of cancer, as in lung cancer where an ORR of 15% [9] was obtained, in urothelial tumors (ORR 25%) [10], in HNCs (ORR 20%) [11,12], gastric cancer (ORR 20%) [13], hepatocellular carcinoma (ORR 20%) [14], ovarian cancer (15 %) [15,16], triple negative breast cancer (ORR 20%) [17], mismatch deficient repair colon cancer (ORR 60%) [18], and Hodgkin lymphoma (ORR 65-80%) [19,20], with new indications in progress in different districts. Moreover, ICIs monotherapy obtained an excellent toxicity profile. Half of the patients diagnosed with neoplasia have an average age above 65 years and thanks to the good toxicity profile of immunotherapy this becomes a good option in curing elderly patients [21]. But the full efficacy and toxicity of these drugs are still widely unknown and unfortunately in randomized clinical trials, the percentage of elderly patients included is very low. Furthermore, comorbiditiy and the aging of the immune system can affect the efficacy and tolerability of these drugs. In this review, we will consider the efficacy of ICIs in the elderly population and evaluate toxicities and its management. Metods We have carried out a careful search of the full papers on PubMed (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/, accessed on 30 June 2022) starting from 2017, inserting as

Patients affected by metastatic carcinoma of the colon/rectum (mCRC) harboring mutations in the BRAF gene (MBRAF) respond poorly to conventional therapy and have a prognosis worse than that of patients without mutations. Despite the promising outcomes of targeted therapy utilizing multi-targeted inhibition of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling system, the therapeutic efficacy, especially for the microsatellite stable/DNA proficient mismatch repair (MSS/PMMR) subtype, remains inadequate. Patients with MBRAF/mCRC and high microsatellite instability or DNA deficient mismatch repair (MSI-H/DMMR) exhibit a substantial tumor mutation burden, suggesting a high probability of response to immunotherapy. It is widely acknowledged that MSS/pMMR/mCRC is an immunologically \"cold\" malignancy that exhibits resistance to immunotherapy. The integration of targeted therapy and immunotherapy may enhance clinical outcomes in patients with MBRAF/mCRC. Efforts to enhance outcomes are exclusively focused on MSS/DMMR-BRAF mutant cancers, which constitute the largest proportion. This review evaluates the clinical efficacy and advancement of novel immune checkpoint blockade therapies for MSI-H/DMMR and MSS/PMMR BRAF mutant mCRC. We examine potential indicators in the tumor immune milieu for forecasting immunotherapeutic response in BRAF mutant mCRC.

Cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy is a standard first-line treatment regimen for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) RAS wild-type (wt); however, the efficacy of cetuximab plus leucovorin, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) had never been demonstrated in a prospective, randomized, controlled phase III study. The TAILOR study is the first randomized, multicenter, prospective Phase III study evaluating the addition of cetuximab to FOLFOX in a RAS wt Chinese population and thus providing confirmatory data for the efficacy and safety of cetuximab plus FOLFOX versus FOLFOX alone.

Background: Nasal polyposis (NP) often coexists with asthma, rhinitis and sinusitis. Polyp histology typically shows chronic, eosinophilic inflammation. The inflammatory cell infiltrate generally includes eosinophils, lymphocytes, plasma cells and mast cells. Objective: To gain insight into the natural history of NP, we analysed mediator levels and leukocyte values in nasal fluids and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), total IgE levels and eosinophils in the blood in several groups of both allergic and non-allergic patients with nasal polyps and in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). Methods: Thirty-two patients with nasal polyps entered the study. As a control group, we studied 55 patients with AR, i.e. 20 patients with seasonal AR to grass pollen, 24 with AR sensitive to Parietaria and 11 with AR sensitive to house dust mite (HDM). Eighteen patients with nasal polyps were also allergic patients (8 were sensitive to Parietaria and 10 were sensitive to HDM), whereas 14 were non-allergic patients. Tryptase and histamine values were assayed in nasal fluids, whereas total IgE was determined in serum. ECP values were assayed both in nasal fluids and serum. Eosinophils were quantified both in the blood and nasal fluids. Results: Tryptase levels were significantly higher in the nasal lavages from patients with NP than in those from patients without NP (4.7 vs. 3.5 U/l, p < 0.001) and correlated with symptom scores (r s = 0.42, p < 0.0001). The median levels of histamine in nasal fluids from patients with NP were also significantly higher than those observed in patients without NP (50.0 vs. 21.3 ng/ml, p < 0.001), but did not correlate with symptom scores. Finally, the median levels of ECP in nasal fluids from patients with NP were significantly higher than those observed in patients without NP (38.1 vs. 16.1 ng/ml, p < 0.001) and correlated with symptom scores (r s = 0.38, p < 0.001). Analysis of variance showed that, among the variables studied, the presence of nasal polyps was the factor responsible for the higher levels of tryptase, histamine and ECP in nasal fluids. With regard to leukocyte counts in nasal fluids, no significant differences were observed between rhinitis patients with NP and those without NP. With regard to serum ECP and serum total IgE, no significant differences were detected between the two groups under study. Blood eosinophil levels in patients with NP were significantly higher than those observed in patients without NP (5.8 vs. 5.6, p = 0.002). Analysis of variance showed that both the presence of nasal polyps and the type of sensitisation were important. Considering the total symptom scores, no significant differences were observed between rhinitis patients with NP and those without NP. Conclusions: The present findings are consistent with the view that chronic eosinophil mucosal inflammatory disease in NP involves a self-sustaining mechanism, i.e. local release of inflammatory mediators, independent of allergen stimulation of nasal mucosa. Increased release of inflammatory mediators contributes to the development of nasal polyps, determining oedema and an increased recruitment of inflammatory cells. Besides eosinophils, mast cells also play a key role in this process.

Although colorectal cancer is increasingly being diagnosed in older patients, their number is largely underrepresented in phase II or III clinical trials. Consequently, guidelines and the SIOG recommendations are not sufficiently clear regarding the treatment of these patients, particularly when chemotherapy is combined with monoclonal antibodies (bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab). Targeted therapy based on the use of anti-epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFRs) is conditioned by the potential for increased toxicity, making it more difficult to treat an older, rat sarcoma virus (RAS) and B rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma (BRAF) wild-type patient. In light of a more detailed characterization of the older population, modernly differentiable between fit, vulnerable, or frail patients on the basis of the comprehensive geriatric assessment, and of the analysis of more recent studies, this review fully collects data from the literature, differentiating the results on functional status patients.

Cetuximab in combinazione con la chemioterapia è un regime di trattamento di prima linea standard per pazienti con carcinoma colorettale metastatico (mCRC) RAS wild-type (wt); tuttavia, l’efficacia di cetuximab più leucovorin, fluorouracile e oxaliplatino (FOLFOX) non era mai stato dimostrato in uno studio di fase III controllato prospettico e randomizzato. Lo studio TAILOR è il primo studio randomizzato, multicentrico, prospettico di fase III che valuta l’aggiunta di cetuximab a FOLFOX in una popolazione RAS wt cinese e fornisce dati di conferma per l’efficacia e la sicurezza di cetuximab più FOLFOX rispetto a FOLFOX da solo.

A multicenter phase I-II trial was carried out with the aim of identifying the dose-limiting toxicity and the maximum tolerated dose of vinorelbine (VNR) in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin at a dose of 20 mg/m(2) every 15 days in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma. In the phase I part of the trial, VNR was given at a dose of 20 mg/m(2) every 15 days to a group of 3 patients. In absence of unacceptable toxicity, VNR was escalated to 25, 30, and 35 mg/m(2) for subsequent groups of 3 patients, until the dose-limiting toxicity was reached. No case of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia was recorded in these patients. Grade 4 neutropenia, grade 3 thrombocytopenia, and grade 3 mucositis were the dose-limiting toxicities recorded in patients treated with VNR 35 mg/m(2). These side effects caused a substantial decrease in programmed dose intensity. Therefore 30 mg/m(2) was considered the maximum tolerated dose of VNR in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 20 mg/m(2), both given every 15 days. These dosages were employed for the treatment of further 18 patients included in phase II of the study. The overall response rate, calculated according to an intention to treat analysis, was 63% (95% CI: 44-80%), with 2 patients achieving a complete response. The median time to progression was 7.0 months or more (range 2-14 months). Median duration of objective responses was 8.4 months or more. The duration of the 2 complete responses was 9 and 14 months, respectively. Median duration of survival was 16.0 months or more (range from 4.0 to >or=24.0). Toxicity was generally mild and easily manageable. Neutropenia and mucositis were the most frequently recorded side effects. A case of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia was recorded in phase II of the study. In conclusion, the maximum tolerated dose of VNR in association with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is 30 mg/m(2) on a bimonthly schedule. Moreover, the combination of VNR and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is active against metastatic breast carcinoma and is associated with a good toxicity profile. Further studies with this combination regimen are warranted.

The 3-week schedule with docetaxel (DTC) 75-100 mg/2 is associated with severe neutropenia, gastro-intestinal side-effects and fluid retention in a significant proportion of patients, which may be of concern in more elderly or poor performance status patients. A phase I-II trial was carried out to test the feasibility and the activity of a new bimonthly schedule of DCT. The trial included a phase I study which aimed at the identification of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of DCT on a bimonthly schedule. The first group of three patients received DCT 40 mg/m2, and in absence of DLT, DCT dosage was escalated by 10 mg/m2/cycle until DLT was reached. In the phase II study, patients were randomized to receive: (a) standard 3-weekly DCT at the dose of 75 mg/m2 (calibration arm); or (b) bimonthly schedule with DCT at the dose recommended in the phase I study. All patients were pretreated with chemotherapy, mostly anthracycline-based regimens, for advanced/metastatic disease. Analysis of response rates, toxicity, and dose-intensity were the main aims of the study. The DLT was represented by severe myelosuppression which was recorded in all patients treated at 70 mg/m2 dose level. Therefore, the MTD was 60 mg/m2 on a bimonthly schedule. However, the dose recommended for the phase II trial was 50 mg/m2, because no difference in delivered dose-intesity was seen between the 50 and 60 mg/m2 dose levels, and the latter dosage was still associated with grade 3 neutropenia in most patients. The parallel phase II study showed that the bimonthly schedule of DCT (50 mg/m2) allows to deliver the same dose-intensity of DCT 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Grade 3-4 side-effects were rather infrequent in patients treated with the bimonthly schedule. Overall response rate (ORR) was 41 and 44% for the DCT 50 mg/m2 bimonthly and the DCT 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, respectively. Data achieved in the phase I part of the study showed that DCT 50 mg/m2 every 15 days is the recommended dose for phase II studies, while results achieved in the phase II trial suggest that DCT 50 mg/m2 in a bimonthly schedule is active as second-line chemotherapy for MBC being able to induce an ORR in the range reported for DCT 75-100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The bimonthly schedule is, however, associated with relatively low toxicity. This characteristic may render the bimonthly schedule particularly attractive for future phase II trials of DCT in combination with other antineoplastic agents.