Download PDF
TumorDiagnostik & Therapie 2014; 35(04): 230-235
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1366524
Thieme Onkologie aktuell
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Adäquate Supportivtherapie im therapeutischen Einsatz von „Biologicals“ bei gastrointestinalen(GI) Tumoren in der Onkochirurgie – Was muss der Chirurg wissen?

Adequate Supportive Treatment in Therapeutic Use of “Biologicals” for GI Tumours in Oncosurgery – What does the Surgeon Need to Know?
E. Kettner
1   Klinik für Radiologie & Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A. ö. R., Magdeburg, Deutschland
,
H. Hütten
2   Klinik für Hämatologie & Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A. ö. R., Magdeburg, Deutschland
,
J. Ricke
1   Klinik für Radiologie & Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A. ö. R., Magdeburg, Deutschland
,
F. Meyer
3   Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral- & Gefäßchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A. ö. R., Magdeburg, Deutschland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 June 2014 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Mit der zunehmenden Anwendung neuartiger antineoplastisch ausgerichteter Substanzen (Inhibitoren, Antikörper [Ak]) entsprechend der Ebenen/Angriffspunkte einer tumorzellspezifischen Signaltransduktionskaskade der Zelle oder von Botenstoffen [„Biologicals“, „targeted therapy“]) ist auch eine neue Qualität, Ausprägung/Intensität und Komplexität von Nebenwirkungen assoziiert, die ebenso für den Onkochirurgen relevant sind.

Ziel: Zusammenfassung klinisch gewonnener Expertise unter Angabe von praxisrelevanten Anwendungs-, Vorgehens- und Verhaltensempfehlungen bei abnormen und Nebenwirkungen sowie toxischen Reaktionen von Biologicals unter Vergleich mit publizistisch verfügbaren Erkenntnissen im systematischen Kurzüberblick der bisher in die klinische Anwendung übergegangenen Substanzen und Präparate bei GI-Tumoren.

Methode: Kompakte Kurzübersicht, basierend auf autorengestützter klinischer Alltagserfahrung inklusive selektiver und vergleichender Literaturrecherche in PubMed (Suchbegriffe: „supportive treatment/therapy“, „biological[s“]).

Ergebnisse: Das dargestellte Profil von Biologicals umfasst: Herceptin®/Trastuzumab (Her2 neu-AK), Erbitux®/Cetuximab (EGFR-AK), Glivec®/Imatinib, Sutent®/Sunitinib und Nexavar®/Sorafenib (als Multikinaseinhibitoren) – Querverweis auf hämatologisch-onkologische Literatur für MabThera®/Rituximab und Sprycel®/Dasatinib; Tasigna®/Nilotinib –, die alle mehr oder weniger schwerwiegende, teils einzelne oder kombinierte, bekannte (hämatologische, gastroenterologische, neurologische und dermatologische nach WHO-Klassifikation) und völlig neuartige (GI-Perforation bei Avastin®; scheinbare Dominanz von neurologischen/dermatologischen Nebeneffekten), aber weitestgehend substanz- bzw. präparate-spezifische Konstellationen auch im Nebenwirkungsspektrum zeigen, die mehrheitlich jedoch durchaus als beherrschbar anzusehen sind. Dieser Umstand erhöht die Anforderungen an die Expertise des heute tätigen versierten Onkologen/Onkochirurgen.

Diskussion: Das Management Biologicals-assoziierter Nebenwirkungen ist ein neuer Aspekt im Gesamtkonzept onkologischer Betreuung, das eine sowohl teils bekannte als auch neue Phänomenologie zeigt und damit adaptierte Therapieansätze erfordert.

Abstract

Background: Along with the increasing use and inauguration of novel antineoplastic substances (inhibitors, antibodies [Ab]) at various levels of the tumour cell-specific intracellular signalling (transduction cascade) on the cell surface and within the cell as well as messengers [“biologicals”, “targeted therapy”]), a new quality, intensity and complexity of adverse effects was simultaneously developed, which have become more and more relevant even to oncosurgeons.

Aim: A summary is given of clinically obtained expertise including recommendations for a competent approach, management and use of biologicals for targeted therapy in case of abnormal or adverse effects as well as toxic reactions, which are compared with available data from the literature and provided as systematic short review on the clinically used substances and drugs in GI tumour lesions.

Methods: The compact overview is based on the authorsʼ daily clinical experiences including a selective and comparative literature search in PubMed (searching strategy using the following terms: “supportive treatment/therapy”, “biological[s]”).

Results: The discussed profile of biologicals comprises: Herceptin®/Trastuzumab (Her2 neu-AK), Erbitux®/Cetuximab (EGFR-AK), Glivec®/Imatinib, Sutent®/Sunitinib and Nexavar®/Sorafenib (multikinase inhibitors) – reference to haematological and oncological literature for MabThera®/Rituximab and Sprycel®/Dasatinib; Tasigna®/Nilotinib. All of them induce more or less severe, partially single or combined, known (haematological, gastroenterological, neurological and dermatological [according to the WHO classification]) or completely novel (GI perforation in case of Avastin®; apparent predominance of neurological and dermatological) adverse effects, which show (in the majority of cases) substance- and/or drug-specific properties in the spectrum of adverse effects, which can be sufficiently managed. These circumstances increase the requirements for the expertise of todayʼs responsible oncologists/oncosurgeons.

Discussion: The management of “biologicals”-associated adverse effects can be considered a novel aspect in the overall concept of oncological care, which shows a partially known as well as novel phenomenology and, thus, requires adapted therapeutic approaches.

Schlüsselwörter

Biologicals - Targeted Therapy - Nebenwirkung - toxische Reaktion - supportive Therapie

Key words

biologicals - targeted therapy - adverse effects - toxic reactions - supporting treatment
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Müller-Tidow C, Krug U, Brunnberg U et al. Tyrosinkinasen als Ziele neuer onkologischer Therapien. Deutsches Ärztebl 2007; 19: 1165-1172
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Weissinger F, Fabbro D, Einsele H. Signalübermittlungsinhibitoren. Onkologe 2007; 13: 213-226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 DeVita VT, Rosenberg SA. Two hundred years of cancer research. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 2207-2214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Zhang XL, Yang YS, Xu DP et al. Comparative study on overexpression of HER2/neu and HER3 in gastric cancer. World J Surg 2009; 33: 2112-2118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Carver JR. Management of trastuzumab-related cardiac dysfunction. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2010; 53: 130-139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ahamed E, Mauri FA, Pakter G et al. Trastuzumab: unusual responses and toxicities. Future Oncol 2009; 5: 779-784
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Cardinale D, Colombo A, Sandri MT et al. Prevention of highdose chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity in high-risk patients by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. Circulation 2006; 114: 2474-2481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hershman DL, Shao T. Anthracycline cardiotoxicity after breast cancer treatment. Oncology (Williston Park) 2009; 23: 227-234
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Harding J, Burtness B. Cetuximab: an epidermal growth factor receptor chemeric human-murine monoclonal antibody. Drugs Today (Barc) 2005; 41: 107-127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Fakih M, Vincent M. Adverse events associated with anti-EGFR therapies for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Curr Oncol 2010; 17 Suppl 1: S18-S30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Stübs P, Habermann P, Wex C et al. Palliative Chemotherapie beim kolorektalen Karzinom – Stand, Wertigkeit, Tendenzen. Zentralbl Chir 2010; 135: 535-540
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Jenab-Wolcott J, Giantonio BJ. Bevacizumab: current indications and future development for management of solid tumors. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2009; 9: 507-517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Eskens FA, Sleijfer S. The use of bevacizumab in colorectal, lung, breast, renal and ovarian cancer: where does it fit?. Eur J Cancer 2008; 44: 2350-2356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Trarbach T, Seeber S. Neue molekulare Targets. Onkologie 2007; 3: 30-38
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Geiger-Gritsch S, Stollenwerk B, Miksad R et al. Safety of bevacizumab in patients with advanced cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Oncologist 2010; 15: 1179-1191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Avastin® – Summary of Product Characteristics. http://www.medicines.org.uk/EMC/medicine/15748/SPC/Avastin+25mg+ml+concentrate+for+solution+for+infusion/ Stand: 08.12.2010
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Zangari M, Fink LM, Elice F et al. Thrombotic events in patients with cancer receiving antiangiogenesis agents. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 4865-4873
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kube R, Meyer F, Bien N et al. Surgical management of bevacizumab-associated peritonitis due to perforation. Zentralbl Chir 2009; 134: 462-467
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Castro JE, James DF, Sandoval-Sus JD et al. Rituximab in combination with high-dose methylprednisolone for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leukemia 2009; 23: 1779-1789
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gao G, Liang X, Jiang J et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of immunochemotherapy with rituximab for B-cell non-Hodgkinʼs lymphoma. Acta Oncol 2010; 49: 3-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Soini EJ, Martikainen JA, Nousiainen T. Treatment of follicular non-Hodgkinʼs lymphoma with or without rituximab: cost-effectiveness and value of information based on a 5-year follow-up. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1189-1197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Choi JS, Braymer JJ, Nanga RP et al. Design of small molecules that target metal-A{beta} species and regulate metal-induced A{beta} aggregation and neurotoxicity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010; 107: 21990-21995
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Marin D. Current status of imatinib as frontline therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia. Semin Hematol 2010; 47: 312-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Zonder JA, Schiffer CA. Update on practical aspects of the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia with imatinib mesylate. Curr Hematol Malig Rep 2006; 1: 141-151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Joensuu H, Trent JC, Reichardt P. Practical management of tyrosine kinase inhibitor-associated side effects in GIST. Cancer Treat Rev 2011; 37: 75-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Wei G, Rafiyath S, Liu D. First-line treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia: dasatinib, nilotinib, or imatinib. J Hematol Oncol 2010; 3: 47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Steins M, Thomas M, Geissler M. Erlotinib. Recent Results Cancer Res 2010; 184: 21-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Younus J, Verma S, Franek J et al. Sunitinib malate for gastrointestinal stromal tumour in imatinib mesylate-resistant patients: recommendations and evidence. Curr Oncol 2010; 17: 4-10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hartmann JT, Haap M, Kopp HG et al. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors – a review on pharmacology, metabolism and side effects. Curr Drug Metab 2009; 10: 470-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Sulkes A. Novel multitargeted anticancer oral therapies: sunitinib and sorafenib as a paradigm. Isr Med Assoc J 2010; 12: 628-632
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Staehler M, Tüllmann C, Nuhn P et al. Systemic therapy of renal cell carcinoma. Urologe A 2010; 49: 1543-1550
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Frenette CT, Frederick RT, Gish RG. Clinical management and case reports for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with sorafenib. J Clin Gastroenterol 2011; 45: 733-737
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Schütte K, Weigt J, Meyer F et al. Palliativtherapie im Grenzgebiet zwischen Gastroenterologie und (Viszeral-)Chirurgie. Zentralbl Chir 2010; 135: 528-534
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar