Multi-target anticancer drugs have a more comprehensive and extensive range of action,and there is an uncertain risk in the combination of two drugs.A case of acute toxicity induced by erlotinib combined with cabozantinib is reported in this article.
Anilides ; adverse effects ; Drug Eruptions ; etiology ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; adverse effects ; Erlotinib Hydrochloride ; adverse effects ; Humans ; Myocardial Infarction ; chemically induced ; Pyridines ; adverse effects

The aim of the present study was to determine whether oncologic outcomes and adverse events associated with active on/off intermittent antiandrogen monotherapy (daily bicalutamide, 50 mg per day) are comparable with those of standard external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) or combined androgen blockade (CAB) therapy in prostate cancers with positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy. Two hundred twenty-three patients with positive surgical margins post-radical prostatectomy who underwent active surveillance (AS, n = 32), EBRT without hormone therapy (n = 55), intermittent antiandrogen monotherapy without EBRT (IAAM, n = 50), or CAB without EBRT (n = 86), between 2007 and 2014, were reviewed retrospectively. Pathologic outcomes, biochemical recurrence rates, radiological disease progression, and adverse events were collected from medical records. Biochemical recurrence rates, biochemical recurrence-free survival rates, and radiological recurrence were not different between the groups (P = 0.225, 0.896, and 0.284, respectively). Adverse event rates and severities were lower for IAAM compared with EBRT or CAB (both P < 0.05), but were comparable to those for AS (P = 0.591 and 0.990, respectively). Grade ≥3 adverse events were not reported in the IAAM or AS groups. Erectile dysfunction and loss of libido rates were lower in the IAAM group compared with the EBRT and CAB groups (P = 0.032). Gastrointestinal complications were more frequently reported in the EBRT group (P = 0.008). Active on/off IAAM treatment might be an appropriate treatment option for patients with positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy. Furthermore, regarding oncologic outcomes, IAAM was comparable to standard EBRT but had a milder adverse event profile.
Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Androgen Antagonists/adverse effects* ; Anilides/adverse effects* ; Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects* ; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use* ; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/adverse effects* ; Disease-Free Survival ; Humans ; Male ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/blood* ; Neoplasm, Residual ; Nitriles/adverse effects* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood* ; Prostatectomy ; Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy* ; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant/adverse effects* ; Retrospective Studies ; Tosyl Compounds/adverse effects*

AIMTo evaluate the long-term effectiveness, side effects and compliance rates of two types of drugs (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone [LHRH] agonist and antiandrogen) that were used individually to treat patients with localized prostate cancer (T1-2) at our institution.

METHODSNinety-seven patients who were diagnosed in the period from April 1997 to January 2000 as having clinically localized prostate cancer (T1-2) received either LHRH agonist (leuprolide acetate 7.5 mg/month) monotherapy (group 1, n = 62) or antiandrogen monotherapy (group 2, n = 35; 18 received bicalutamide 50 mg q.d., 13 received nilutamide 150 mg t.i.d. and 4 received flutamide 250 mg t.i.d.). The mean age in both groups was 76 years.

RESULTSThe mean follow-up time was (50.8 +/- 8.5) months in group 1 and (43.1 +/- 2.2) months in group 2. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels rose in only 1 of the 62 patients (1.6%) in group 1, and in 20 of the 35 patients (57.1%) in group 2. In group 2, 10 of the 20 patients (50%) with increasing PSA levels were treated with LHRH salvage therapy, and eight (80%) responded. Hot flashes (54.8%) and lethargy (41.9%) were the most common side effects in group 1. In contrast, nipple-tenderness (40%) and light-dark adaptation (17.1%) were more often seen in group 2. Only 1 of the 62 patients (1.6%) in group 1 switched to another medication because of adverse side effects; whereas 8 of the 35 patients (22.9%) in group 2 did so.

CONCLUSIONUnlike antiandrogen monotherapy, LHRH agonist monotherapy provided long-term durable control of localized prostate cancer (T1-2). It can also be an effective treatment option for patients whose disease failed to respond to antiandrogen monotherapy. The limitations of our study are the lack of health outcomes analysis and a small sample size.

Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Androgen Antagonists ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Anilides ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Flutamide ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone ; agonists ; Humans ; Imidazolidines ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Leuprolide ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Male ; Nitriles ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; blood ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; drug therapy ; Retrospective Studies ; Tosyl Compounds ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use