DOCSLIB.ORG

Bone Cancer Treatment Regimens

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bone Cancer Treatment Regimens Bone Cancer Treatment Regimens Clinical Trials: The NCCN recommends cancer patient participation in clinical trials as the gold standard for treatment. Cancer therapy selection, dosing, administration, and the management of related adverse events can be a complex process that should be handled by an experienced health care team. Clinicians must choose and verify treatment options based on the individual patient; drug dose modifications and supportive care interventions should be administered accordingly. The cancer treatment regimens below may include both U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved and unapproved indications/regimens. These regimens are provided only to supplement the latest treatment strategies. These Guidelines are a work in progress that may be refined as often as new significant data become available. The NCCN Guidelines® are a consensus statement of its authors regarding their views of currently accepted approaches to treatment. Any clinician seeking to apply or consult any NCCN Guidelines® is expected to use independent medical judgment in the context of individual clinical circumstances to determine any patient’s care or treatment. The NCCN makes no warranties of any kind whatsoever regarding their content, use, or application and disclaims any responsibility for their application or use in any way. Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated. uSystemic Therapy for MSI-H/dMMR Tumors1 REGIMEN DOSING Preferred Regimens Pembrolizumab2-6,a Day 1: Pembrolizumab 200mg IV over 30 minutes. Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for up to 2 years. OR Day 1: Pembrolizumab 400mg IV over 30 minutes. Repeat cycle every 6 weeks for up to 2 years. uSystemic Therapy for TMB-H (≥10 mutations/megabase) Tumors1 Useful in Certain Circumstances Pembrolizumab2-6,b Day 1: Pembrolizumab 200mg IV over 30 minutes. Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for up to 2 years. OR Day 1: Pembrolizumab 400mg IV over 30 minutes. Repeat cycle every 6 weeks for up to 2 years. uSystemic Therapy for Chondrosarcoma: Metastatic and Widespread Disease Other Recommended Regimens Dasatinib7-9,c Days 1-28: Dasatinib 70mg-100mg orally twice daily. Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. Pazopanib10,11,c Days 1-28: Pazopanib 800mg orally daily. Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. uSystemic Therapy for Chondrosarcoma Conventional (Grades 1-3)1 Preferred Regimens No known standard chemotherapy options1 Useful in Certain Circumstances Ivosidenib Days 1-28: Ivosidenib 500mg orally daily. (for susceptible IDH1 mutations)12,13,c Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. uSystemic Therapy for Chondrosarcoma Dedifferentiated1 Preferred Regimens Follow osteosarcoma regimens (Category 2B)1 Useful in Certain Circumstances Ivosidenib Days 1-28: Ivosidenib 500mg orally daily. (for susceptible IDH1 mutations)12-13,c Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. uSystemic Therapy for Chondrosarcoma Mesenchymal1 Preferred Regimens Follow Ewing Sarcoma Regimens (category 2B)1 continued 1 CancerTherapyAdvisor.com Bone Cancer Treatment Regimens uSystemic Therapy for Chordoma1 REGIMEN DOSING Other Recommended Regimens Dasatinib7-9,c Days 1-28: Dasatinib 70mg-100mg orally twice daily. Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. Imatinib14,c Days 1-28 : Imatinib 400mg orally twice daily. Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. Sunitinib17,18,c,e Days 1-28: Sunitinib 37.5mg orally daily. Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. Useful in Certain Circumstances Erlotinib19,20,c Days 1-28: Erlotinib 150mg orally once daily. Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. Imatinib + Cisplatin14,19,21,22,c,d Day 1: Cisplatin 25mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes. Days 1-7: Imatinibc 400mg orally daily. Repeat cycle every week. Imatinib + Sirolimus14,23,24,c Days 1-28: Imatinib 400mg orally once daily Days 1-28: Sirolimus 2mg orally once daily (dose is adjusted to keep concentration within therapeutic range of 15-20 ng/mL). Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. Lapatinib (for EGFR mutation-positive Days 1-28: Lapatinib 1500mg orally once daily. chordomas)25,26,c Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. Sorafenib27-30,c,e Days 1-28: Sorafenib 400mg orally twice daily. Repeat cycle every 4 weeks. uEwing Sarcoma First-line Therapy (Primary/Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Therapy)1 Preferred Regimens VDC/IE Day 1: Vincristine 2mg/m2 (maximum 2mg) IV over 5-10 minutes (Vincristine + Doxorubicin/Dactinomycin Day 1: Doxorubicin 75mg/m2 IV push + Cyclophosphamide Alternate with OR Ifosfamide and Etoposide) Day 1: Dactinomycin 1,250mcg/m2 IV push (Category 1)31-36,f-i Day 1: Cyclophosphamide 1,200mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes Day 1: Mesna 240mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (one dose before cyclophosphamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each cyclophosphamide dose) Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for cycles 1 and 3 (neoadjuvant) and cycles 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 17 (adjuvant), or cycles 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 17 (metastatic), alternating with: Days 1-5: Ifosfamide 1,800mg/m2 IV over 3 hours daily Days 1-5: Mesna 360mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (one dose before ifosfamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each ifosfamide dose) Days 1-5: Etoposide 100mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes daily. Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for cycles 2 and 4 (neoadjuvant) and cycles 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 (adjuvant) or cycles 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 (metastatic), alternating with: VDC regimen (shown above). VDC/IE Day 1: Vincristine 2mg/m2 IV (maximum 2mg) IV over 5-10 minutes (as neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy for Days 1-2: Doxorubicin 37.5mg/m2 IV over 5-10 minutes OR patients aged <50 years) Day 1: Doxorubicin 75mg/m2 IV push OR (Category 1)31-37,f-i Day 1: Dactinomycin 1,250mcg/m2 IV push Day 1: Cyclophosphamide 1,200mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes Day 1: Mesna 240mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (one dose before cyclophosphamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each cyclophosphamide dose). Repeat cycle every 2 weeks for cycles 1, 3, and 5 (neoadjuvant) and cycles 7, 9, 11, and 13 (adjuvant), alternating with: Days 1-5: Ifosfamide 1,800mg/m2 IV over 3 hours daily Days 1-5: Mesna 360mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (one dose before ifosfamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each ifosfamide dose). Days 1-5: Etoposide 100mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes daily. Repeat cycle every 2 weeks for cycles 2, 4, and 6 (neoadjuvant) and cycles 8, 10, 12, and 14 (adjuvant), alternating with: VDC regimen (shown above). continued 2 CancerTherapyAdvisor.com Bone Cancer Treatment Regimens uEwing Sarcoma First-line Therapy (Primary/Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Therapy)1 (continued) REGIMEN DOSING Other Recommended Regimens VAI Day 1: Vincristine 1.5mg/m2 (maximum 2mg) IV over 5-10 minutes (Vincristine + Doxorubicin/Dactinomycin Days 1-2: Doxorubicin (even numbered cycles) 30mg/m2 IV push once daily + Ifosfamide)31,32,34,38,39,f,g,i Days 1-3: Dactinomycin (odd-numbered cycles) 500mcg/m2 IV push once daily Days 1-3: Ifosfamide 2,000mg/m2 IV over 3 hours once daily Days 1-3: Mesna 400mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (once prior to ifosfamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each ifosfamide dose). Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for 4-8 cycles (neoadjuvant) and 5-12 cycles (adjuvant) or 14 cycles (metastatic). VIDE Day 1: Vincristine 1.5mg/m2 (maximum 2mg) IV over 5-10 minutes (Vincristine + Ifosfamide + Doxorubicin/ Days 1-3: Ifosfamide 3,000mg/m2 IV over 3 hours daily Dactinomycin + Etoposide)31,32,34,35,40,41,f,g,i Days 1-3: Mesna 600mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes 3 times daily (once prior to ifosfamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each ifosfamide dose) Days 1-3: Doxorubicin 20mg/m2 IV push daily OR Days 1-3: Dactinomycin 500mcg/m2 IV push daily Days 1-3: Etoposide 150mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes daily. Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for 4-8 cycles (neoadjuvant) and 5-12 cycles (adjuvant) for total of 9-16 cycles or 14 cycles total (metastatic). uEwing Sarcoma Primary Therapy for Metastatic Disease at Initial Presentation1 Preferred Regimens VDC/IE Day 1: Vincristine 2mg/m2 (maximum 2mg) IV over 5-10 minutes (Vincristine + Doxorubicin/Dactinomycin Day 1: Doxorubicin 75mg/m2 IV push OR + Cyclophosphamide Day 1: Dactinomycin 1,250mcg/m2 IV push Alternate with Ifosfamide and Day 1: Cyclophosphamide 1,200mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes Etoposide)31-37,f,g,i Day 1: Mesna 240mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (one dose before cyclophosphamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each cyclophosphamide dose) Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for cycles 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 17 (metastatic), alternating with: Days 1-5: Ifosfamide 1,800mg/m2 IV over 3 hours daily Days 1-5: Mesna 360mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (one dose before ifosfamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each ifosfamide dose) Days 1-5: Etoposide 100mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes daily. Repeat cycle every 3 weeks for cycles 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 (metastatic), alternating with: VDC regimen (shown above). VAI Day 1: Vincristine 1.5mg/m2 (maximum 2mg) IV over 5-10 minutes (Vincristine + Doxorubicin/Dactinomycin Days 1-2: Doxorubicin (even numbered cycles) 30mg/m2 IV push once daily + Ifosfamide)31,32,34,38,39,f,g,i Days 1-3: Dactinomycin (odd-numbered cycles) 500mcg/m2 IV push once daily Days 1-3: Ifosfamide 2,000mg/m2 IV over 3 hours once daily Days 1-3: Mesna 400mg/m2 IV over 15 minutes three times daily (once prior to ifosfamide, then at 4 and 8 hours from the start of each ifosfamide dose).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cstone Pharmaceuticals 基石藥業
    Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited and The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited take no responsibility for the contents of this announcement, make no representation as to its accuracy or completeness and expressly disclaim any liability whatsoever for any loss howsoever arising from or in reliance upon the whole or any part of the contents of this announcement. The forward-looking statements made in this announcement relate only to the events or information as of the date on which the statements are made in this announcement. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, after the date on which the statements are made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. You should read this announcement completely and with the understanding that our actual future results or performance may be materially different from what we expect. In this announcement, statements of, or references to, our intentions or those of any of our directors and/or our Company are made as of the date of this announcement. Any of these intentions may alter in light of future development. CStone Pharmaceuticals 基 石 藥 業 (Incorporated in the Cayman Islands with limited liability) (Stock Code: 2616) VOLUNTARY ANNOUNCEMENT CSTONE SUCCESSFULLY HOSTED THE FIRST U.S. R&D DAY IN NEW YORK CStone Pharmaceuticals (the “Company” or “CStone”) announces that it successfully hosted its 2020 U.S. R&D Day in New York City, the United States on January 21, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • ESMO 2019 Update
    ESMO 2019 Update Axel Grothey Director, GI Oncology Research West Cancer Center Research Institute Encorafenib plus Cetuximab With or Without Binimetinib for BRAF V600E–Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Expanded Results from a Randomized, 3-Arm, Phase 3 Study vs. the Choice of Either Irinotecan or FOLFIRI plus Cetuximab (BEACON CRC) Josep Tabernero, Axel Grothey, Eric Van Cutsem, Rona Yaeger, Harpreet Wasan, Takayuki Yoshino, Jayesh Desai, Fortunato Ciardiello, Fotios Loupakis, Yong Sang Hong, Neeltje Steeghs, Tormod Kyrre Guren, Hendrik-Tobias Arkenau, Pilar Garcia-Alfonso, Ashwin Gollerkeri, Michael Pickard, Kati Maharry, Janna Christy-Bittel, Lisa Anderson, and Scott Kopetz BEACON CRC: Binimetinib, Encorafenib, And Cetuximab COmbiNed to Treat BRAF-mutant ColoRectal Cancer 2 Study Design Patients with BRAFV600E mCRC with disease progression after 1 or 2 prior regimens; ECOG PS of 0 or 1; and no prior treatment with any RAF inhibitor, MEK inhibitor, or EGFR inhibitor Phase 3 Primary Endpoints: Safety Lead-in ENCORAFENIB + Triplet therapy BINIMETINIB + ENCORAFENIB + BINIMETINIB + CETUXIMAB Triplet vs Control n = 205 CETUXIMAB N = 30 OS R Doublet therapy (All randomized Pts) Encorafenib 300 mg PO daily 1:1:1 ENCORAFENIB + CETUXIMAB Binimetinib 45 mg PO bid n = 205 Cetuximab standard weekly ORR – dosing Blinded Central Control arm Review FOLFIRI + CETUXIMAB, or (1st 331 randomized Pts) irinotecan + CETUXIMAB n = 205 Randomization was stratified by ECOG PS (0 vs. 1), prior use of irinotecan (yes vs. no), and cetuximab source (US-licensed vs. EU-approved) Secondary Endpoints: Doublet vs Control and Triplet vs Doublet - OS & ORR, PFS, Safety QOL Assessments: EORTC QOL Questionnaire (QLQ C30), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Colon Cancer, EuroQol 5D5L, and Patient Global Impression of Change).
    [Show full text]
  • TIBSOVO® (Ivosidenib) Oral
    PHARMACY COVERAGE GUIDELINES ORIGINAL EFFECTIVE DATE: 9/20/2018 SECTION: DRUGS LAST REVIEW DATE: 8/19/2021 LAST CRITERIA REVISION DATE: 8/19/2021 ARCHIVE DATE: TIBSOVO® (ivosidenib) oral Coverage for services, procedures, medical devices and drugs are dependent upon benefit eligibility as outlined in the member's specific benefit plan. This Pharmacy Coverage Guideline must be read in its entirety to determine coverage eligibility, if any. This Pharmacy Coverage Guideline provides information related to coverage determinations only and does not imply that a service or treatment is clinically appropriate or inappropriate. The provider and the member are responsible for all decisions regarding the appropriateness of care. Providers should provide BCBSAZ complete medical rationale when requesting any exceptions to these guidelines. The section identified as “Description” defines or describes a service, procedure, medical device or drug and is in no way intended as a statement of medical necessity and/or coverage. The section identified as “Criteria” defines criteria to determine whether a service, procedure, medical device or drug is considered medically necessary or experimental or investigational. State or federal mandates, e.g., FEP program, may dictate that any drug, device or biological product approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may not be considered experimental or investigational and thus the drug, device or biological product may be assessed only on the basis of medical necessity. Pharmacy Coverage Guidelines are subject to change as new information becomes available. For purposes of this Pharmacy Coverage Guideline, the terms "experimental" and "investigational" are considered to be interchangeable. BLUE CROSS®, BLUE SHIELD® and the Cross and Shield Symbols are registered service marks of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, an association of independent Blue Cross and Blue Shield Plans.
    [Show full text]
  • Recognizing Toxicites of Oral Oncolytics in the Management of Hematologic Malignancies
    Recognizing Toxicites of Oral Oncolytics in the Management of Hematologic Malignancies David Reeves, PharmD, BCOP Associate Professor of Pharmacy Practice Butler University Clinical Pharmacy Specialist – Hematology/Oncology Franciscan Health Indianapolis Objectives & Disclosure Identify common adverse effects associated with oral oncolytic therapies utilized to treat hematologic malignancies Propose a strategy to manage a patient experiencing an adverse effect while receiving an oral oncolytic agent Disclosure – I have no conflicts of interest to disclose – All materials and content presented do not infringe or violate any copyright, trademark, patent or intellectual property rights of any person or entity, nor do they promote or endorse any product, service, or device which may or is at the time of the program not approved by any governing agency Common Toxicities Rash/Dermatologic Nausea/Vomiting Diarrhea Cardiac toxicities toxicities Electrolyte Infection Myelosuppression Hepatotoxicity abnormalities Tumor lysis Fatigue Hypothyroidism Pneumonitis syndrome Human Kinome Nature Immunology. 2009;10:356-60. PeerJ. 2013;1:e126. Impact of Oral Oncolytic Toxicity ESAS-r Symptom Score (%) Mild Moderate Severe Symptom (0-3) (4-6) (7-10) Eight oncology practices in Pain 80 15 5 Michigan Tiredness 65 21 14 Drowsiness 75 16 9 • Investigation of patient-reported Nausea 92 6 2 outcomes Appetite 79 13 8 • Evaluate symptom burden of patients Shortness of Breath 87 9 3 prescribed oral oncolytics before each Depression 86 11 3 outpatient visit Anxiety 87 10 3 Well-being 66 21 13 1,235 ESAS-r surveys collected Constipation 87 10 3 Diarrhea 92 5 3 Tingling/numbness 81 12 6 • Symptoms categorized as mild, Mouth sores 96 3 1 moderate or severe ESA-r: revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System J Oncol Pract.
    [Show full text]
  • Nanocarriers As Magic Bullets in the Treatment of Leukemia
    nanomaterials Review Nanocarriers as Magic Bullets in the Treatment of Leukemia 1, 2, 1 2 Mohammad Houshmand y , Francesca Garello y , Paola Circosta , Rachele Stefania , Silvio Aime 2, Giuseppe Saglio 1 and Claudia Giachino 1,* 1 Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Torino, 10043 Torino, Italy; [email protected] (M.H.); [email protected] (P.C.); [email protected] (G.S.) 2 Molecular and Preclinical Imaging Centres, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Torino, 10126 Torino, Italy; [email protected] (F.G.); [email protected] (R.S.); [email protected] (S.A.) * Correspondence: [email protected] These authors contributed equally to this work. y Received: 23 December 2019; Accepted: 1 February 2020; Published: 6 February 2020 Abstract: Leukemia is a type of hematopoietic stem/progenitor cell malignancy characterized by the accumulation of immature cells in the blood and bone marrow. Treatment strategies mainly rely on the administration of chemotherapeutic agents, which, unfortunately, are known for their high toxicity and side effects. The concept of targeted therapy as magic bullet was introduced by Paul Erlich about 100 years ago, to inspire new therapies able to tackle the disadvantages of chemotherapeutic agents. Currently, nanoparticles are considered viable options in the treatment of different types of cancer, including leukemia. The main advantages associated with the use of these nanocarriers summarized as follows: i) they may be designed to target leukemic cells selectively; ii) they invariably enhance bioavailability and blood circulation half-life; iii) their mode of action is expected to reduce side effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Advances in the Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukemia: New Drugs and New Challenges
    Published OnlineFirst February 3, 2020; DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-19-1011 REVIEW Advances in the Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukemia: New Drugs and New Challenges Nicholas J. Short , Marina Konopleva , Tapan M. Kadia , Gautam Borthakur , Farhad Ravandi , Courtney D. DiNardo , and Naval Daver ABSTRACT The therapeutic armamentarium of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has rapidly expanded in the past few years, driven largely by translational research into its genomic landscape and an improved understanding of mechanisms of resistance to conventional thera- pies. However, primary and secondary drug resistance remains a substantial problem for most patients. Research into the mechanisms of resistance to these new agents is informing the development of the next class of AML drugs and the design of combination regimens aimed at optimally exploiting thera- peutic vulnerabilities, with the ultimate goal of eradicating all subclones of the disease and increasing cure rates in AML. Signifi cance: AML is a heterogeneous disease, characterized by a broad spectrum of molecular altera- tions that infl uence clinical outcomes and also provide potential targets for drug development. This review discusses the current and emerging therapeutic landscape of AML, highlighting novel classes of drugs and how our expanding knowledge of mechanisms of resistance are informing future therapies and providing new opportunities for effective combination strategies. INTRODUCTION importance of the apoptotic machinery in chemotherapy resistance and AML propagation has also led to the devel- Driven by intense basic and translational research, the opment of apoptosis-inducing therapies that appear to be past 10 to 15 years have greatly improved our understanding effi cacious irrespective of the presence or absence of targeta- of the pathobiology and genetic diversity of acute myeloid ble genetic mutations ( 6, 7 ).
    [Show full text]
  • EHA2021 Abstracts: What's Hot in AML?
    EHA2021 abstracts: What’s hot in AML? To help navigate the exciting content being presented at the EHA2021 Virtual Congress, the AML Hub Steering Committee members have provided their recommendations for the top abstracts to look out for in AML, including bothin both theclinical clinical content content and anddisease disease biology biology sessions. sessions. Click the abstracts to view Oral presentations Acute myeloid leukemia - Biology & Translational Research Noncoding regulatory locus MYNRL15 modulates chromatin architecture S120 and represents a novel myeloid leukemia dependency Isoform-specific and signaling-dependent propagation of acute myeloid S122 leukemia by Wilms tumor 1 TET3 promotes growth and epigenetically regulates glucose metabolism and S124 leukemic stem cell associated pathways in acute myeloid leukemia Inhibition of cystine import by repurposing of sulfasalazine to treat acute S126 myeloid leukemia Functional in vivo characteristics of PDX AML single cell clones predict S127 outcome in large AML patient cohorts Standardizing NGS-MRD in AML: An international study by the ELN-MRD S128 working party Acute myeloid leukemia - Clinical Sequential NCRI AML trials show consistent benefit for RIC transplant in CR1 S130 for older patients >60years that is independent of MRD status after first induction Survival outcomes from the QUAZAR AML-001 trial with oral azacitidine for S131 patients with acute myeloid leukemia in remission by disease subtype, cytogenetic risk, and NPM1 mutation status at diagnosis RUNX1 mutations in
    [Show full text]
  • FRI SUN AB 3.15Pm 2019 NCODA Fall Oral Oncology Upate
    NEW OPTIONS FOR PATIENTS: 2019 ORAL ONCOLOGY UPDATE Kirollos Hanna, PharmD, BCPS, BCOP Assistant Professor of Pharmacy Mayo Clinic College of Medicine Hematology/Oncology Clinical Pharmacist M Health Fairview FACULTY DISCLOSURES Kirollos S. Hanna, PharmD, BCPS, BCOP has the following disclosures with commercial interests to disclose: Consultant – Seattle Genetics, Hyloris Pharmaceuticals; Speaker's Bureau - Seattle Genetics, Abbvie; Stock/ Shareholder – CVS; Advisory Boards - Aztrazeneca, Incyte, Sandoz, Rigel, Taiho, Heron, Astellas, Seattle Genetics, Abbvie The content of this activity may include information regarding the use of products that may be inconsistent with, or outside the approved labeling for, these products in the United States. Pharmacists should note that the use of these products outside current approved labeling is considered experimental and are advised to consult the prescribing information for these products. DRUG APPROVALS AND EXPANSION 2018 – 2019 • 2018 – 63 Oral updates • 2018 – 27 2019 – 8 novel • 2019 – 33 updates therapies updates • 2019 – 18 Overall updates Novel Hematology/Oncology (Cancer) Approvals & Safety Notifications. FDA; FDA website. Accessed October 19, 2019. THE ROLE OF HCPS IN OC MANAGEMENT Maintenance •AE management •Adherence and Need for Coordination compliance •Cyclic labs •Cyclic labs •Methods of •Refills Medically Initiation communication •Drug-drug interactions •Refills Integrated •Inappropriate dosing •Provider appointments •Baseline labs and •Updated insurance plans monitoring Model •Need for education •Insurance and procurement Pharmacists provide clinical considerations and operational best practices to optimize oral chemotherapy dispensing and management. Timmers L, et al. BMC Cancer. 2017;17(1):122; Mulkerin DL, et al. J Oncol Pract. 2016;12(10):e912-e923; Battis B, et al. J Oncol Pharm Pract.
    [Show full text]
  • A Perspective from Clinical Trials
    biomolecules Review Development of Possible Next Line of Systemic Therapies for Gemcitabine-Resistant Biliary Tract Cancers: A Perspective from Clinical Trials Nai-Jung Chiang 1,2, Li-Tzong Chen 1,2,3, Yan-Shen Shan 4,5, Chun-Nan Yeh 6,* and Ming-Huang Chen 7,8,* 1 National Institute of Cancer Research, National Health Research Institutes, Tainan 704, Taiwan; [email protected] (N.-J.C.); [email protected] (L.-T.C.) 2 Department of Oncology, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 704, Taiwan 3 Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital and Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung 807, Taiwan 4 Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 704, Taiwan; [email protected] 5 Department of Surgery, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, Tainan 704, Taiwan 6 Department of General Surgery and Liver Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan 7 Center for Immuno-Oncology, Department of Oncology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan 8 School of Medicine, National Yang Ming University, Taipei 112, Taiwan * Correspondence: [email protected] (C.-N.Y.); [email protected] (M.-H.C.); Tel.: +886-33281200 (C.-N.Y.); +886-28712121 (ext. 2508) (M.-H.C.); Fax: +886-33285818 (C.-N.Y.); +886-28732131 (M.-H.C.) Abstract: Biliary tract cancer (BTC) compromises a heterogenous group of tumors with poor prog- noses. Curative surgery remains the first choice for localized disease; however, most BTC pa- tients have had unresectable or metastatic disease.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda…………………………………………………………………………….Stan Hupfeld, Chair
    OKLAHOMA HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY AMENDED BOARD MEETING June 30, 2020 at 3:00 P.M. Oklahoma Health Care Authority Videoconference A G E N D A This meeting will occur via videoconference, but certain parties, including CEO Corbett, Chair Hupfeld, and OHCA staff, will be present at the OHCA building at 4345 N. Lincoln Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73105. All other OHCA Board members will participate in the videoconference from a remote location. Videoconference Participants Stanley Hupfeld – Zoom videoconference Jean Hausheer, M.D. – Zoom videoconference Alex Yaffe – Zoom videoconference Philip Kennedy – Zoom videoconference Robert Boyd – Zoom videoconference Randy Curry, D. Ph. – Zoom videoconference Tanya Case – Zoom videoconference Laura Shamblin, M.D. – Zoom videoconference Public access via Zoom: https://okhca.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_7uIAzauSRyyO0WEl3Rq3dg Telephone: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 973 4151 1117 1. Call to Order / Determination of Quorum…………………………………………………Stan Hupfeld, Chair 2. Consent Agenda…………………………………………………………………………….Stan Hupfeld, Chair a) Approval of the May 18, 2020 OHCA Board Meeting Minutes(Attachment “A”) b) Approval of State Plan Amendment Rate Committee Rates (Attachment “B”) 3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report…………………………………….Kevin Corbett, Chief Executive Officer a) Presentation by Joe Moser, Health Management Associates 4. Chief of Staff’s Report…………………………………………………..............Ellen Buettner, Chief of Staff 5. Chief Operating Officer’s Report………………………………....Melody Anthony, Chief Operating Officer (Attachment “C”)
    [Show full text]
  • Evolving Treatment Options in Acute Myeloid Leukemia
    Evolving Treatment Options in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Lydia Benitez, PharmD, BCOP Adult Outpatient Leukemia Specialist, Michigan Medicine Adjunct Faculty, University of Michigan College of Pharmacy Disclosures I have no conflicts of interest with relation to the content of this presentation 2 Learning Objectives • Describe the mechanism of action of novel agents in treatment of AML • Examine the efficacy and safety data for newly approved agents • Evaluate the place in therapy for discussed therapeutic agents, including the role of stewardship • Develop a treatment plan for a patient with AML based on disease features 3 Abbreviations Disease Related Efficacy Endpoints • AML: acute myeloid leukemia • CR: complete remission — NOS: not otherwise specified • CRh: complete response with partial hematologic recovery — AML-MRC: AML with myelodysplastic related changes — platelets > 50,000/µL and absolute neutrophil count > 1000/µL — sAML: secondary AML — CBF: core binding factor • CRi: complete remission with incomplete count recovery — platelets < 100,000/µL and/or absolute neutrophil count < 1000/µL • AlloHCT: allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant • CRp: complete response with incomplete platelet hematologic recovery • ECOG PS: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status — platelets < 100,000/µL • IDH: isocitrate dehydrogenase • DFS: disease free survival • MDS: myelodysplastic syndrome • DoR: Duration of response • WBC: white blood cell • MLFS: morphologic leukemia free-state Safety • MRS: measurable residual disease • AE: adverse event • NR: not reached • ALT: alanine aminotransferase • NS: no statistically significant difference • AST: aspartate aminotransferase • ORR: overall response rate • EKG: electrocardiogram • PR: partial response • DDI: Drug-drug interactions • R/R: relapsed/refractory • T. bili: total bilirubin • RFS: relapse-free survival 4 Audience Participation How many new agents have been approved in the last 2 years for the treatment of AML? A.
    [Show full text]
  • New Directions for Emerging Therapies in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: the Next Chapter Naval Daver 1,Andrewh.Wei2, Daniel A
    Daver et al. Blood Cancer Journal (2020) 10:107 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-020-00376-1 Blood Cancer Journal REVIEW ARTICLE Open Access New directions for emerging therapies in acute myeloid leukemia: the next chapter Naval Daver 1,AndrewH.Wei2, Daniel A. Pollyea3,AmirT.Fathi4,PareshVyas 5 and Courtney D. DiNardo 1 Abstract Conventional therapy for acute myeloid leukemia is composed of remission induction with cytarabine- and anthracycline-containing regimens, followed by consolidation therapy, including allogeneic stem cell transplantation, to prolong remission. In recent years, there has been a significant shift toward the use of novel and effective, target- directed therapies, including inhibitors of mutant FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) and isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH), the B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor venetoclax, and the hedgehog pathway inhibitor glasdegib. In older patients the combination of a hypomethylating agent or low-dose cytarabine, venetoclax achieved composite response rates that approximate those seen with standard induction regimens in similar populations, but with potentially less toxicity and early mortality. Preclinical data suggest synergy between venetoclax and FLT3- and IDH-targeted therapies, and doublets of venetoclax with inhibitors targeting these mutations have shown promising clinical activity in early stage trials. Triplet regimens involving the hypomethylating agent and venetoclax with FLT3 or IDH1/2 inhibitor, the TP53- modulating agent APR-246 and magrolimab, myeloid cell leukemia-1 inhibitors, or immune therapies such as CD123 antibody-drug conjugates and programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitors are currently being evaluated. It is hoped that such triplets, when applied in appropriate patient subsets, will further enhance remission rates, and more importantly remission durations and survival.
    [Show full text]