Tag: Research

6 Myths About Chemotherapy

Scott Tagawa, M.D.

dr-scott-tagawaChemotherapy often gets a bad rap due to the perception that the side effects of this cancer treatment are severe. What many people don’t know is chemotherapy refers to an umbrella category for different medications that work in a similar way. Just as different cancers are unique, chemotherapies are also unique and use different formula compounds. They also have brand and generic names.

I want to dispel some of the things I hear from patients about chemotherapy. Here are 6 of the most common chemo myths and misconceptions:

  1. It doesn’t work. False! While new cancer treatments are continuously being researched and developed, chemo remains the treatment gold standard for many types of cancers – including testicular cancer and metastatic prostate and bladder cancers – because it works. Through rigorous research, chemo has been shown to improve survival and increase the cure rates for many cancers, especially genitourinary (GU) cancers. Testicular cancer now has an approximately 99% cure rate which was not possible before chemotherapy. Additionally, chemotherapy increases the cure rates for bladder cancer and was more recently shown to have one of the most significant increases in survival compared to any other prior therapy for prostate cancer. Unfortunately, chemo doesn’t always work on every single type of cancer. In addition to the development of novel therapies, work is ongoing to help us select patients that will have more or less benefit from chemotherapy.
  2. It has significant side effects. This is partially true depending on what type of chemo you’re taking and what you perceive to be a negative side effect. Some chemotherapies cause hair loss as they attack the cancer cells, and this is one of the most “visible” side effects of treatment. What many people don’t realize, however, is that chemo can make patients feel better almost immediately because of its ability to control the cancer. For example, the first chemotherapy approved for prostate cancer (mitoxantrone) was approved because it made men feel better. The next generation chemotherapy (docetaxel) made men feel even better when compared to mitoxantrone. Moreover, the impact chemo has on quality of life is often short-term. Longer term, patients who undergo chemo report feeling better. A recently presented study showed that while overall quality of life was worse at an early time point during chemotherapy, men with metastatic prostate cancer had a superior quality of life a year later. This is likely due to the combination of better long-term cancer control and the fact that most chemo-related side effects are temporary. Additionally, while new treatment options, including immunotherapies, hold promise for many types of cancers, these do not work for everyone and are not without side effects either.
  3. It isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach. There are over 200 types of chemotherapies, each differing in function and specific use. For example, platinum-based chemotherapies are mainly used for bladder cancers while taxanes are used for prostate cancer.
  4. It isn’t a targeted treatment. Chemo is targeted in certain ways because it acts on specific receptors. For example, taxanes, which are one type of chemotherapy agent, have the ability to stop cells from growing by targeting structures inside the cell that help it multiply. In prostate cancer specifically, taxanes kill cancer cells by blocking the movement of specific receptors that promote cancer growth. At Weill Cornell Medicine and NewYork-Presbyterian, we are able to analyze the tumor for genomic mutations that can tell us whether you are more or less likely to respond to this type of treatment.
  5. It is painful. When you are receiving cycles of chemotherapy, it should not hurt. Some patients receive chemo through an IV (intravenously), while other chemos are given as oral medications that you can take at home. Most genitourinary cancer patients undergo treatment on an outpatient basis. If you experience discomfort, burning, or coolness speak to your nurse or another member of your cancer healthcare team.
  6. Chemo suppresses the immune system. I commonly hear this from patients as a reason to avoid chemo. While there is an infection risk associated with chemotherapy if blood counts are low, current data indicates that combining chemo with immunotherapy (either together or sequentially with one followed by the other) may be better than immunotherapy alone.

Oncologists and researchers are always looking for the best treatment options to bring cures to the greatest number of cancer patients. For many patients, chemo remains the best option at controlling the cancer growth and ultimately curing the cancer. For some patients, newer approaches such as immunotherapy or other biologic agents are more tailored to fighting their disease. At Weill Cornell Medicine, we continue to work on identifying which chemotherapy is best for the right tumor in the right patient at the right time, as well as developing strategies to deliver chemotherapy preferentially to tumors (sparing normal organs), and continuing to develop new immunotherapies and biologic-based approaches to treatment.

A Meeting of the Minds in Prague

prague-aua-programLast week, approximately 100 of the leading experts in genitourinary (GU) cancer research and treatment converged in Prague in the Czech Republic for the 114th Annual American Urology Association (AUA) Meeting. The AUA’s mission is “to promote the highest standards of urological clinical care through education, research and in the formulation of health care policy.”

The AUA has over 22,000 members from across the country, and many of the Weill Cornell Medicine/NewYork-Presbyterian GU physicians serve as members of the New York chapter. At this year’s meeting, doctors David Nanus, Jim Hu, and Scott Tagawa were invited to present on the latest standards in screening and treatment for prostate, bladder and kidney cancers.

jim-hu_aua-prague-2016On Thursday, September 15th, Dr. Jim Hu spoke about the screening controversy surrounding the early detection of prostate cancer and how this influences present day practice and the medical care men are receiving. We have a number of different screening tools available to detect prostate cancer and distinguish between aggressive and non-aggressive sub-types. One of the most common and least invasive ways to screen for prostate cancer is through Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing, but this is controversial because some argue that it leads to false positives, or the detection of cancers that are very slow growing and may never need treatment. Most physicians and scientists agree that PSA testing isn’t perfect, but research shows that it can be a very good screening indicator when used in conjunction with physical exams, biomarkers and imaging tools. In addition, analysis of a recent study demonstrated that surveillance remains an option for some men with little difference in 10-year survival in those that choose treatment with either surgery or radiation, though there are tradeoffs in terms of a higher likelihood of developing advanced cancer in those that avoid more aggressive treatment.

Later that day, Dr. Scott Tagawa provided an update on the impact of chemotherapy in treating prostate cancer – a modality that was once thought to be a treatment last-resort. Chemo is now a standard much earlier on during cancer care and people are living longer, and feeling better as a result. In particular, the earlier use of a short course of chemotherapy at the time that men initially present to the clinic with advance prostate cancer leads to a significant increase in survival combined with better overall quality of life in the longer-term. The two taxane chemotherapy drugs proven to be successful in prostate cancer are docetaxel and cabazitaxel, and the latest research on these drugs seeks to answer questions regarding for whom and when these treatments will be benefit. At Weill Cornell/NYP we are leading the field in this research and developing hi-tech biomarkers to determine sensitivity and resistance.

Dr. David Nanus presented on Friday and highlighted the latest advances in treating urothelial cancers of the kidney and bladder. After nearly three decades with no new FDA drug approvals for bladder cancer, in 2016 we witnessed great treatment advances for bladder cancer. With immunotherapy, chemotherapy and genomics, we’re now on the cusp of precision medicine. The combination of these approaches with novel treatments is improving the lives of many of our patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. We are now able to offer complete tumor and germline (inherited) genomic analysis as part of research studies that in the near term will translate to selecting the optimal treatment strategy for each individual patient.

Is Surgery Critical for Advanced Kidney Cancer?

Drs. Ana Molina, Jim Hu and David Nanus address key issues in an editorial published this week in the Journal of Clinical Oncology

Surgical HandsUntil the last decade, there was much debate on the standard of care treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), commonly referred to as advanced kidney cancer. Some physicians believed that the best treatment was to surgically remove the kidney, a process called cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN), while others argued that surgery did more harm than good.

In 2001 and 2004, two randomized clinical trials compared the two approaches (cytokine therapy alone vs. surgery plus cytokine therapy) in a controlled, side-by-side fashion and demonstrated a survival benefit for patients who had surgery followed by cytokine therapy. Cytokines are man-made versions of naturally occurring proteins that can enhance the immune response to cancer. This research found that patients that underwent surgery in addition to being given the cytokine interferon medication showed an average survival of 13.6 months, compared with 7.8 months for those who only received the interferon treatment, demonstrating a 31% reduced risk of death. Based on this study, urologists and oncologists continued to recommend surgery, seeing major improvements in disease-free and overall survival in patients who had their primary kidney tumors surgically removed.

Over the past ten years, there have been critical advancements in the treatment of kidney cancer and targeted therapies (i.e. vascular endothelial-growth factor inhibitors) have replaced cytokine therapy as the standard of care. Targeted therapies block the growth and spread of cancer by interfering with specific molecular targets associated with cancer. The role of surgery has become unclear since the introduction of targeted therapy. Of note, nearly 90% of patients enrolled in the early studies examining targeted therapies had undergone nephrectomy.

Retrospective studies suggest that surgery improves outcomes and reduces the risk of death from cancer by more than 50%. Despite possible improved outcomes, we have seen a decline in the use of surgery. A recent study sought to evaluate current utilization rates of surgery and examined the survival benefit of surgery compared with no surgery. They noted that currently only three out of 10 patients receiving targeted therapy undergo surgery. In addition, socioeconomic and racial disparities were associated with these declines. Younger, white people with private insurance and earlier stage cancer are more likely to have their tumors removed. These declines are also more significant at community hospitals than academic centers. This is important to point out because research also shows that African Americans with metastatic kidney cancer have a poorer prognosis than white patients, and inferior survival is more pronounced in black patients who do not undergo surgery.

Two large, phase 3 randomized clinical trials (CARMENA and SURTIME) will provide answers about the role of surgery in the era of targeted therapy. The CARMENA study is enrolling patients in France and comparing the outcomes of surgery followed by targeted therapy versus targeted therapy alone. The European SURTIME study is comparing the impact of patients undergoing immediate surgery and then receiving targeted therapy with patients first receiving targeted therapy and then deferred surgery. Until these two studies are completed and the results are available, we recommend that all medical oncologists and urologists carefully evaluate each patient and consider surgery when feasible.