Search

PURPOSE: This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of telemedicine (TM) using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer. METHODS: We searched six electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov) through June 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of TM using videoconferencing systems compared with usual face-to-face care in outpatient care for patients with cancer. We assessed the certainty of evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: From the 2,400 articles screened, six randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. Two studies evaluated the use of TM in cancer follow-up and four investigated psychotherapy for cancer. TM using videoconferencing systems may result in no differences in primary outcomes such as patient satisfaction (standardized mean difference, 0.11; 95% CI, –0.18 to 0.40) and outpatient attendance complete proportion (risk difference, 0.02%; 95% CI, –0.04 to 0.09), and secondary outcomes such as medical professional satisfaction, time devoted to outpatient care, and depression score. The certainty of evidence for these outcomes was low. Although the average money spent on outpatient visit was a primary outcome, the level of evidence was uncertain. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that TM using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer may be as effective as usual face-to-face care. Use of TM more frequently may be considered for patients with cancer who are expected to obtain benefit from TM using videoconference systems. Telemedicine using videoconferencing in outpatient care for patients with cancer may be as effective as usual care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: In PALOMA-2, palbociclib plus letrozole significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) as initial treatment of estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer. We assessed the benefit of palbociclib plus letrozole in Asians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 666 enrolled postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer (no prior treatment of advanced disease), 95 were Asian. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive palbociclib plus letrozole or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end points were overall survival, objective response, patient-reported outcomes, pharmacokinetics, and safety. RESULTS: Median PFS was significantly longer in Asian patients who received palbociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole (25.7 months [95% CI, 19.2 months to not estimable] v 13.9 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 22.0 months]; hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.87; P =.007). The most common toxicities with palbociclib were hematologic and more frequent among Asians versus non-Asians: neutropenia (any grade, 95.4% v 76.8%; grade 3/4, 89.2% v 62.5%), leukopenia (43.1% v 38.3%; 32.3% v 23.5%), and thrombocytopenia (27.7% v 13.5%; 4.6% v 1.1%). No Asians had febrile neutropenia. Discontinuation rates as a result of adverse events were similar among Asian and non-Asian patients who received palbociclib plus letrozole (10.8% and 9.5%). In Asians, quality of life (QOL) was maintained with no significant differences observed between treatments from baseline in breast cancer–specific QOL and general health status scores. Change from baseline in EuroQol five dimensions index scores was significantly higher with palbociclib plus letrozole (0.013 v –0.069; P =.0132). Geometric mean palbociclib trough concentration values were higher in Asians versus non-Asians (93.8 v 61.7 ng/mL). CONCLUSION: Consistent with the overall study population, the addition of palbociclib to letrozole significantly improved PFS in Asians. Hematologic toxicities were more frequent in Asians versus non-Asians but manageable with early dose modifications while maintaining QOL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Adjuvant trastuzumab monotherapy has not been compared with trastuzumab + chemotherapy. We investigated the relative value of trastuzumab monotherapy for older patients with breast cancer., Methods: This study was an open-label, randomized controlled study with a treatment selection design in which a noninferiority criterion was predefined. Patients aged 70-80 years with surgically treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive invasive breast cancer received trastuzumab monotherapy or trastuzumab + chemotherapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS) with assessment of prespecified hazard ratio (HR), relapse-free survival (RFS), adverse events (AEs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and restricted mean survival time (RMST)., Results: The study involved 275 patients (mean age, 73.5 years) who were followed up for a mean of 4.1 years (range, 0.3-8.0 years). The percentages of patients by cancer stage were as follows: I (pT > 0.5 cm), 43.6%; IIA, 41.7%; IIB, 13.5%; and IIIA, 1.1%. Three-year DFS was 89.5% with trastuzumab monotherapy versus 93.8% with trastuzumab + chemotherapy (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.58; P = .51). At 3 years, RMST differed by -0.39 months between arms (95% CI, -1.71 to 0.93; P = .56). Three-year RFS was 92.4% with trastuzumab monotherapy versus 95.3% with trastuzumab + chemotherapy (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.63 to 2.79; P = .53). Common AEs were anorexia (7.4% v 44.3%; P < .0001) and alopecia (2.2% v 71.7%; P < .0001), and grade 3/4 nonhematologic AEs occurred in 11.9% versus 29.8% ( P = .0003) for trastuzumab monotherapy versus trastuzumab + chemotherapy, respectively. Clinically meaningful HRQoL deterioration rate showed significant differences at 2 months (31% for trastuzumab monotherapy v 48% for trastuzumab + chemotherapy; P = .016) and at 1 year (19% v 38%; P = .009)., Conclusion: The primary objective of noninferiority for trastuzumab monotherapy was not met. However, the observed loss of survival without chemotherapy was < 1 month at 3 years. Therefore, and in light of the lower toxicity and more favorable HRQoL profile, trastuzumab monotherapy can be considered an adjuvant therapy option for selected older patients.