Cargando…
Analysis of efficacy and safety of vismodegib therapy in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma – real world multicenter cohort study
BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most frequent non‐melanoma skin cancer. The basis of treatment is surgical resection. The treatment of locally advanced and metastatic disease is currently based on sonidegb or vismodegib, small molecule inhibitors of the hedgehog signalling pathway. OBJ...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9541446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35279879 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.18070 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most frequent non‐melanoma skin cancer. The basis of treatment is surgical resection. The treatment of locally advanced and metastatic disease is currently based on sonidegb or vismodegib, small molecule inhibitors of the hedgehog signalling pathway. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to retrospectively analyse the efficacy and safety of treatment with vismodegib in 108 patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease treated from August 1st, 2017 to December 31st, 2020. The primary objective was to evaluate the objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival rates. The secondary aims of the study were the disease control rate, the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and the estimation of the factors that potentially impact the treatment outcome and patient survival. METHODS: Patients treated in national drug programme were enrolled into this retrospective cohort study. Evaluation of the treatment efficacy was performed according to CT/MRI scans and by the response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) 1.1. The safety evaluation was performed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v. 5.0 (CTCAE) classification and severity assessment. RESULTS: The median duration of treatment was 14 months (range 1–94 months). The median progression‐free survival reached 30.5 months (95% CI; 24.8–36.3), and the progression‐free survival rate after 6, 12 and 24‐months were 92%, 78% and 61%, respectively. The median overall survival was 41.5 months (95% CI; 31.6–51.3), and the overall survival rate after 1, 2 and 3 years accordingly 86%, 73% and 60%. The univariant and multivariant analysis indicated that the female gender is an independent positive prognostic factor of progression‐free survival. CONCLUSIONS: The response to treatment is the prognostic factor for response maintenance and better overall survival. The therapy was well tolerated with the safety profile consistent in general with known from previous studies. |
---|