Search

Clinical trials of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) targeted radiopharmaceuticals have shown encouraging results. Some agents, like lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 ([ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA-617), are already approved for late line treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Projections are for continued growth of this treatment modality; [ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 is being studied both in earlier stages of disease and in combination with other anti-cancer therapies. Further, the drug development pipeline is deep with variations of PSMA-targeting radionuclides, including higher energy alpha particles conjugated to PSMA-honing vectors. It is safe to assume that an increasing number of patients will be exposed to PSMA-targeted radiopharmaceuticals during the course of their cancer treatment. In this setting, it is important to better understand and mitigate the most commonly encountered toxicities. One particularly vexing side effect is xerostomia. In this review, we discuss the scope of the problem, inventories to better characterize and monitor this troublesome side effect, and approaches to preserve salivary function and effectively palliate symptoms. This article aims to serve as a useful reference for prescribers of PSMA-targeted radiopharmaceuticals, while also commenting on areas of missing data and opportunities for future research., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Context: Palliative care integration for patients with hematologic diseases has lagged behind solid-organ malignancies. Previous work has characterized hematologist perspectives, but less is known about palliative care physician views of this phenomenon., Objectives: To examine palliative care physician attitudes and beliefs regarding hematologic diseases, patient care, and collaboration., Methods: A 44-item survey containing Likert and free-response items was mailed to 1000 AAHPM physician members. Sections explored respondent comfort with specific diagnoses, palliative care integration, relationships with hematologists, and hematology-specific patient care. Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to compare parallel Likert responses. Free responses were analyzed using thematic analysis., Results: The response rate was 55.5%. Respondents reported comfort managing symptoms in leukemia (84.0%), lymphoma (92.1%), multiple myeloma (92.9%), and following hematopoietic stem cell transplant (51.6%). Fewer expressed comfort with understanding disease trajectory (64.9%, 75.7%, 78.5%, and 35.4%) and discussing prognosis (71.0%, 82.6%, 81.6%, and 40.6%). 97.6% of respondents disagreed that palliative care and hematology are incompatible. 50.6% felt that palliative care physicians' limited hematology-specific knowledge hinders collaboration. 89.4% felt that relapse should trigger referral. 80.0% felt that hospice referrals occurred late. In exploring perceptions of hematology-palliative care relationships, three themes were identified: misperceptions of palliative care, desire for integration, and lacking a shared model of understanding., Conclusion: These data inform efforts to integrate palliative care into hematologic care at large, echoing previous studies of hematologist perspectives. Palliative care physicians express enthusiasm for caring for these patients, desire for improved understanding of palliative care, and ongoing opportunities to improve hematology-specific knowledge and skills., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Recently updated American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines for Prevention and Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN) in Survivors of Adult Cancers make a single recommendation to alter treatment by delaying, decreasing, or discontinuing dosing in patients who develop CIPN during neurotoxic chemotherapy treatment. Dosing guidelines have inconsistent recommendations for when (i.e., what CIPN severity) and how (i.e., delay, decrease, or discontinue) to alter neurotoxic chemotherapy treatment in patients with CIPN. Clinical decision making requires an understanding the benefits and risks of treatment alteration, in addition to consideration of other disease and patient factors. This review summarizes four areas of literature and culminates in a patient-centric decision framework to guide clinicians in helping patients to make treatment alteration decisions. First, we describe the current practice of altering treatment due to CIPN, including treatment alteration recommendations and published rates. Second, we summarize the potential benefits of treatment alteration including the reduction in CIPN severity and persistence. Third, we evaluate the potential risk of treatment alteration in compromising treatment efficacy by reviewing prospective trials comparing dosing regimens and retrospective analyses of the effect of relative dose intensity on efficacy. Fourth, we summarize disease and patient factors that should be considered when making a treatment alteration decision for a patient. We then propose a patient-centric decision framework that clinicians can use to assess an individual patient's current and anticipated future CIPN severity and compare that to their maximum tolerable severity to determine whether they should continue, delay, decrease, or discontinue neurotoxic chemotherapy., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Context: Preliminary trials report that Scrambler Therapy, a form of electroanalgesia, may improve discomfort from chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN)., Objective: The objective of this phase II, randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the efficacy of Scrambler therapy vs. transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in treating CIPN., Methods: Fifty patients were accrued for the first half of this two-part, crossover trial consisting of a 2-week treatment period with either Scrambler or TENS, followed by an 8-week observation period, and then crossover treatment. Twenty-two patients proceeded to the crossover phase. The primary means of assessment was patient-reported outcomes, including symptom severity scales and Global Impression of Change questionnaires. Symptoms were assessed daily during the treatment period and weekly during an 8-week observation period., Results: A 50% or greater reduction in primary symptom (pain or tingling) score on the last day of treatment was achieved by 6 of 10 Scrambler-treated patients (60%) and 3 of 12 TENS-treated patients (25%) after crossover (P = 0.11). By day 4 of treatment, the two arms diverged with respect to mean change in primary symptom score; this effect was largely carried through to the end of the two-week treatment period. Similarly, Scrambler therapy appeared better than TENS when assessed by Global Impression of Change for neuropathy, pain, and overall quality of life., Conclusions: Similar findings from the initial randomization and crossover phases of this study support further evaluation of the efficacy of Scrambler therapy in alleviating CIPN symptoms. Evaluation in a larger, randomized controlled trial with standardized treatment is warranted., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)