Cancer patients with bone metastases treated with BRIs seem to have a slightly higher risk of ONJ early after switching from bisphosphonates to denosumab compared to patients remaining on bisphosphonates. Nevertheless, based on the global ONJ-incidence, the switch from bisphosphonates to denosumab can be considered as safe as an equivalent exposure to denosumab from the start on.

With a global MRONJ-incidence of 11%, patients receiving concomitant treatment with VEGFR-TKIs and BRIs have a five to ten times higher risk for development of MRONJ compared to patients treated with BRIs alone.

Submit your article to this journal Background: About 40% of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC) patients receive a second-line targeted therapy after failure of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (anti-VEGFR-TKI). Efficacy of second-line therapy is usually limited and prognostic and predictive factors at the start of second-line therapy are lacking. To identify the subgroup of patients that will benefit from such treatment remains a challenge. Methods: We performed a multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients who received a second-line therapy after progression on an anti-VEGFR-TKI. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed in order to identify prognostic factors for progressive disease (PD) as best response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) on second-line therapy. Results: For the whole cohort of 108 patients, mOS from the start of second-line therapy was 8.9 months while mPFS on second-line therapy was 2.8 months. A total of 49/105 (47%) patients had PD, 50/105 (48%) stable disease (SD) and 6/105 (6%) a partial response (PR). On multivariate analysis, the following markers were associated with improved outcome on second-line therapy: a PFS on first-line therapy 12 months (HR for PFS: 1.961; p ¼ 0.008) (HR for OS: 1.724; p ¼ 0.037) and Fuhrman grade 1-2 tumors (HR for OS: 2.198; p ¼ 0.007). Markers associated with poorer outcome on second-line therapy were: elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels (HR for PFS: 0.511; p ¼ 0.04) (HR for OS: 0.392; p ¼ 0.017), low albumin (HR for OS: 0.392; p ¼ 0.01) and elevated corrected calcium levels (HR for OS: 0.416; p ¼ 0.01). The impact on OS of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) and International Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic scores as calculated at start of second-line therapy was validated in our patient series. Conclusions: Duration of first-line PFS, Fuhrman grade, serum LDH levels, albumin levels, corrected calcium levels and the MSKCC and IMDC scores calculated at start of second-line therapy are prognostic factors for m-ccRCC patients treated with second-line targeted therapy.

Introduction Advances in systemic chemotherapy, molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy have extended and improved the quality of life of patients with cancer. However, the central nervous system is very susceptible to complications of systemic cancer and its treatment. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is a rare clinical and neuroradiologic entity which has garnered increasing recognition in the past two decades. Cancer patients are generally treated with cytotoxic agents, immunotherapy, molecular targeted therapies or glucosteroids which are more frequently associated with PRES. Case presentation A 59-year old female, known with a relapse of her lung adenocarcinoma, had been treated with 4 cycles of cisplatin (75 mg/m²) and pemetrexed (500 mg/m²). Six weeks after this combination chemotherapy and within 28 h after the administration of pemetrexed maintenance therapy, she developed a generalised epileptic insult. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain showed bilateral areas of increased signal intensity in the subcortical parietal and frontal white matter. She was treated with a broad spectrum antiseizure drug, levetiracetam 750 mg twice daily and strict control of blood pressure. Discussion Diagnosis of PRES should be considered in all patients with neurologic symptoms who are at risk to develop PRES. It is crucial to establish the diagnosis as soon as possible since there is no specific treatment of PRES other than correction of the underlying risk factors and preventing seizure recurrence. Administration of pemetrexed is a possible risk factor for the development of PRES.

Combination therapy using a BRAF and MEK inhibitor significantly improves both progression-free and overall survival in patients with BRAF V600-mutated stage IV melanoma. Dual MAPK inhibition achieves an objective response in the majority of patients. We present a case of a woman with BRAF V600E-mutated malignant melanoma and rapidly progressing liver, bone, and lymph node metastases. The patient commenced dabrafenib and trametinib with clinical and biochemical signs of response after 2 days. On day 3 she developed grade 3 liver hemorrhage, which was successfully embolized. Her anemia responded appropriately to transfusions and stabilized after interventional resolution of the hemorrhagic event. Subsequently she developed a pathological fracture of the right proximal humerus. MRI showed cystic bone metastases with stigmata of bleeding. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of a patient with hemorrhage of both liver and bone metastases of a melanoma. As the patient responded rapidly to dabrafenib and trametinib we hypothesize that the hemorrhage may be due to rapid tumor necrosis and bleeding of affected tumor supplying blood vessels. Our case demonstrates the importance of considering tumoral bleeding as a side effect of BRAF and MEK inhibition in responding melanoma patients. Mechanical intervention can be effective in resolving this treatment-related adverse event.