Search

Simple Summary Unplanned hospitalizations (UHs) are common among elderly patients with cancer who receive chemotherapy. This fact decreases quality of life or performance status and increases health costs. Our objective was to determine predictive factors for UH in this population. A score based on six variables taken from geriatric assessment and chemotherapy characteristics was developed in a series of 493 elderly patients receiving chemotherapy. The use of this score may reliably identify patients at risk for UH, thus helping to plan treatment, implement adaptive measures, and set up a close follow-up schedule. Purpose: To determine the incidence of unplanned hospitalization (UH) and to identify risk factors for UH in elderly patients with cancer who start chemotherapy. Methods: In all, 493 patients over 70 years starting new chemotherapy regimens were prospectively included. A pre-chemotherapy geriatric assessment was performed, and tumor and treatment variables were collected. The association between these factors and UH was examined by using multivariable logistic regression. Score points were assigned to each risk factor. Results: During the first 6 months of treatment, 37% of patients had at least one episode of UH. Risk factors were the use of combination chemotherapy at standard doses, a MAX2 index >= 1, a Charlson comorbidity score >= 2, albumin level = 1, and weight loss >5%. Three risk groups for UH were established according to the score in all patients: 0-1: 17.5%; 2: 34%; and 3-7: 57% (p < 0.001). The area under receiver operation characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.67-0.77). Conclusion: This simple tool can help to reduce the incidence of UH in elderly patients with cancer who are scheduled to initiate chemotherapy treatment.

Background Standard oncology tools are inadequate to distinguish which older patients are at higher risk of developing chemotherapy-related complications. Materials and Methods Patients over 70 years of age starting new chemotherapy regimens were prospectively included in a multicenter study. A prechemotherapy assessment that included sociodemographics, tumor/treatment variables, and geriatric assessment variables was performed. Association between these factors and the development of grade 3-5 toxicity was examined by using logistic regression. Results A total of 551 patients were accrued. Chemotherapy doses (odds ratio [OR] 1.834; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.237-2.719) and creatinine clearance (OR 0.989; 95% CI 0.981-0.997) were the only factors independently associated with toxicity. Only 19% of patients who received reduced doses of chemotherapy and had a creatinine clearance >= 40 mL/minute had grade 3-4 toxicity, compared with 38% of those who received standard doses or had a creatinine clearance

Although approximately 50% of cancer patients are 70 years of age or older, cancer treatment in the elderly remains a therapeutic challenge. The elderly form a very heterogeneous group in relation to their general health state, degree of dependence, comorbidities, performance status, physical reserve and geriatric situation, for which therapeutic decisions must be made in an individualized manner. In addition, changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the drugs occur with age, as well as the tolerance of the tissues, leading to a narrowing of the therapeutic margin and an increase in toxicity. In the general population, Performace Status (PS) has traditionally been used to estimate tolerance to chemotherapy, but in the elderly population it is not useful. In this review we summarize the current knowledge about the pharmacology of antineoplastic drugs in the elderly and the tools available to help us identify risk of chemotherapy toxicity in these patients.

Journal Article; Pancreatic cancer remains an aggressive disease with a 5 year survival rate of 5%. Only 15% of patients with pancreatic cancer are eligible for radical surgery. Evidence suggests a benefit on survival with adjuvant chemotherapy (gemcitabine o fluourouracil) after R1/R0 resection. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is also a valid option in patients with positive margins. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as the involvement of the mesenteric vasculature with a limited extension. These tumors are technically resectable, but with a high risk of positive margins. Neoadjuvant treatment represents the best option for achieving an R0 resection. In advanced disease, two new chemotherapy treatment schemes (Folfirinox or Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel) have showed improvements in overall survival compared with gemcitabine alone. Progress in pancreatic cancer treatment will require a better knowledge of the molecular biology of this disease, focusing on personalized cancer therapies in the near future. Yes

Aim VITAL, a phase II single‐arm study, aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of panitumumab addition to 5‐fluorouracil (5‐FU), mitomycin‐C (MMC) and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with localized squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (SCCAC). Methods Adult, treatment‐naïve SCCAC patients (Stage T2‐T4, any N, M0) and ECOG‐PS ≤2, received panitumumab (6 mg/kg, day 1 and Q2W; 8 weeks), 5‐FU (1000 mg/m2/d, days 1‐4 and 29‐32), MMC (10 mg/m2, days 1 and 29) and RT 45 Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction) to the primary tumor and mesorectal, iliac and inguinal lymph nodes, plus 10‐15 Gy boost dose to the primary tumor and affected lymph nodes. The primary objective was disease free survival rate (DFS) at 3‐years (expected 3‐year DFS rate: 73.7 ± 12%). Results Fifty‐eight patients (31 women; median age: 59 years; ECOG‐PS 0‐1:98%; TNM II [29%] (T2 or T3/N0/M0)/IIIA (T1‐T3/N1/M0 or T4/N0/M0) [21%]/IIIB (T4/N1/M0 or any T/N2 or N3/M0) [47%]/nonevaluable [4%]) were included. The median follow‐up was 45 months. The 3‐year DFS rate was 61.1% (95% CI: 47.1, 72.4). The 3‐year overall survival rate was 78.4% (95% CI: 65.1, 87.1). Eighteen patients (31.0%) required a colostomy within 2 years posttreatment. Grade 3‐4 toxicities were experienced by 53 (91%) patients. Most common grade 3‐4 treatment‐related events were radiation skin injury (40%) and neutropenia (24%). No toxic deaths occurred. Improved efficacy in colostomy‐free survival and complete response rate was observed in human papilloma virus positive patients. Conclusions Panitumumab addition to MMC‐5FU regimen in SCCAC patients increases toxicity and does not improve patients’ outcomes. RT plus MMC‐5FU remains the standard of care for localized SCCAC patients., VITAL, a phase II single‐arm study, was aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of panitumumab addition to 5‐fluorouracil (5‐FU), mitomycin‐C (MMC) and radiotherapy in patients with localized squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (SCCAC). The study concluded that panitumumab addition to MMC‐5FU regimen in SCCAC patients increases toxicity and does not improve patients’ outcomes.

Background In patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the role of maintenance therapy after first-line treatment with chemotherapy plus antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (MoAb) is still an object of debate. Methods We assessed the efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a switch maintenance strategy after upfront 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus an anti- EGFR MoAb in patients with RAS WT mCRC. RAVELLO was a phase III, international, double-blind, placebocontrolled, academic trial. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival and toxicity. Regorafenib or placebo were administered daily for 3 weeks of 4-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, up to 24 months. Results The study was stopped prematurely due to slow accrual and lack of funding after the randomisation of 21 patients: 11 in the regorafenib arm and 10 in the placebo arm. The small sample size precludes any statistical analysis. Toxicity was acceptable and consistent with the known regorafenib safety profile. Median PFS was similar in the two arms. However, a subgroup of patients treated with regorafenib experienced a remarkably long PFS. Three patients were progression free at 9 months in the regorafenib arm versus one patient in the placebo arm, whereas at 12 months two regorafenib-treated patients were still progression free versus none in the placebo arm. Conclusion RAVELLO trial demonstrated that growing financial and bureaucratic hurdles affect the feasibility of independent academic research. Although stopped prematurely and within the limited sample size, RAVELLO suggests that regorafenib has not a major activity in maintenance setting after upfront chemotherapy and anti-EGFR MoAb. However, a subgroup of patients experienced a remarkable long PFS, indicating that a better refinement of the patient population would help to identify subjects that might benefit from a regorafenib personalised approach in the switch maintenance setting