Search

We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of maintaining or withdrawing abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had experienced cancer progression to this treatment and were beginning a docetaxel-based therapy. Phase II, randomised, open-label study conducted in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. After open-label treatment with AAP, patients who had experienced cancer progression to AAP were randomised to 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus AAP or to receive 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus 10 mg of prednisone orally daily. The primary outcome was the radiographic progression-free survival rate at 12 months as evaluated by the investigators in all randomised patients. A total of 148 patients were included in open-label treatment with AAP, and of them, 94 patients were randomised to receive either docetaxel plus AAP (intervention group; n = 47) or docetaxel plus prednisone (control group; n = 47). The 12-month radiographic progression-free survival rates did not differ between the intervention group (34.9%; 95% CI 20.7-49.2) and the control group (33.9%; 95% CI 19.5-48.3). There were no significant differences in the time to radiographic progression and the overall survival between the intervention and control groups. Grade 3-5 neutropenia with the combination of docetaxel plus prednisone and AA was more frequent than with docetaxel plus prednisone (59.6% versus 27.7%). Our results indicate that the therapeutic strategy of maintaining AAP added to docetaxel in chemotherapy-naïve patients who have experienced cancer progression to AAP treatment should not be further evaluated and should be avoided in clinical practice. NCT02036060 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02036060.

Background: The management of Breakthrough cancer Pain (BTcP) remains unsatisfactory. Although many barriers to BTcP management have been identified, oncologists have not been able to overcome them. The aim of this study is to identify the barriers preventing proper BTcP management that Spanish medical oncologists have found, and to reach a consensus in order to draft the appropriate recommendations to overcome them. Methods: This study is based on two surveys conducted by oncologists. The first survey was designed to reach a consensus on the main barriers (related to patients, physicians and healthcare organizations) that stand in the way of BTcP control. The second survey (a Delphi questionnaire) was based on the barriers evaluated in the first survey, including recommendations assessed using the two-round Delphi methodology.

AimTo assess the predictive and prognostic aim of interim and end-treatment 18F-fluorocholine PET/CT (FCH-PET/CT) and 99mTc-methilen diphosphonate bone scintigraphy (BS) in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases (CRPC-BM) treated with Radium 223 dichloride (223Ra). Methods: Prospective and multicentre ChoPET-Rad study including 82 patients with CRPC-BM. Baseline, after 3 (interim) and 6 doses (end-treatment) BS and FCH PET/CT were performed in patients who meet the study criteria. Clinical variables, imaging and clinical progression were obtained and their association with progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) was studied. Agreement between BS and FCH PET/CT response was assessed using Kappa (K) analysis.Results:Median of PFS and OS was 3 and 16 months, respectively. Agreement between interim BS and FCH PET/CT was weak (K: 0.28; p=0.004). No agreement was observed between end-treatment diagnostic studiesInterim and end-treatment FCH PET/CT were related to PFS (p=0.011 and pConclusions: Interim and end-treatment FCH PET/CT were good predictors of biochemical progression in patients treated with 223Ra. Therapeutic failure and progression in interim BS or FCH PET/CT were adverse factors for OS.

The management of genitourinary cancer, including bladder, prostate, renal and testicular cancer, has evolved dramatically in recent years due to a better understanding of tumour genetic mutations, alterations in molecular pathways, and to the development of new kinds of drugs such as targeted therapies and immunotherapies. In the field of immunotherapy, new drugs focused on stimulating, enhancing and modulating the immune system to detect and destroy cancer, have been recently discovered. Research in oncology moves quickly and new data of great relevance for clinical practice are communicated every year. For this reason, a group of experts, focused exclusively on the treatment of genitourinary tumours and who get together every year in the BestGU conference to assess the latest progress in this field have summarized the most important advances in a single review, along with a critical assessment of whether these results should alter daily clinical practice.

Bone metastases are common in many advanced solid tumours, being breast, prostate, thyroid, lung, and renal cancer the most prevalent. Bone metastases can produce skeletal-related events (SREs), defined as pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, need of bone irradiation or need of bone surgery, and hypercalcaemia. Patients with bone metastases experience pain, functional impairment and have a negative impact on their quality of life. Several imaging techniques are available for diagnosis of this disease. Bone-targeted therapies include zoledronic acid, a potent biphosfonate, and denosumab, an anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody. Both reduce the risk and/or delay the development of SREs in several types of tumours. Radium 233, an alpha-particle emitter, increases overall survival in patients with bone metastases from resistant castration prostate cancer. Multidisciplinary approach is essential and bone surgery and radiotherapy should be integrated in the treatment of bone metastases when necessary. This SEOM Guideline reviews bone metastases pathogenesis, clinical presentations, lab tests, imaging techniques for diagnosis and response assessment, bone-targeted agents, and local therapies, as radiation and surgery, and establishes recommendations for the management of patients with metastases to bone.

e17043 Background: Checkpoint Inhibitors (CPI) have become a new standard of treatment in advanced urothelial carcinoma. However, little is known regarding the outcome of patients in daily practice.We aimed to assess tumor response and toxicity of CPIs in a cohort of patients treated in “real world” conditions. In parallel, a comprehensive molecular study in tumor samples from these patients, is ongoing. Methods: We designed an observational retrospective study within the “Grupo Centro” collaborative group. Adult patients diagnosed of metastasic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) and treated with CPIs between 2011-2019 in any of the 20 centers of the group, were eligible. Results: Up to date 100 patients have been included (82% males) with a median age of 74 years (48 -96). In 82% patients primary was bladder cancer. Most common metastasic sites were bone (26%) and liver (16%).With a median follow up of 10,6 months(mo) median progression free survival (mPFS) was 6,6mo (1,4-95,4 range) and median Overall Survival (mOS) was 21.3mo (3,8-121,8). 38% of patients received CPIs in first line(L): atezolizumab:27, pembrolizumab: 10, nivolumab:1. The median number of cycles was 8,2. Up to 51% received platinum-based combinations in first line. 69% (69/100) pts received 2L treatment: 68% with CPIs, 27,5% with chemotherapy and 4% with FGFR inhibitors (as part of a clinical trial). 2L mPFS was 3,5 mo (1,9-25.9). 23% (23/100) patients received 3L, of them 26% (6/23) were treated with CPIs. 3L mPFS:8,3mo(0,4-43,8). As a whole, patients treated with CPI accross different lines, achieved complete response in 8% of the cases, partial response in 18% and stable disease in 15%. Up to 44% of cases presented progressive disease as best response and evaluation was not available in 15%. Most common G1-2 AEs related to immunotherapy were: asthenia:31%,pruritus:16% and anorexia: 9%.10% pts experienced G3-4 toxicity: asthenia G3: 4, diarrhea G3: 1, erythrodysesthesia G3:1, arthromyalgia G3: 1, cardiac arrest G4:1,pneumonitis G4:1,anemia G3:1. Conclusions: This study confirms the efficacy and security of CPIs in real world. Response rates and toxicity profile were comparable to those reported in clinical trials.

95 Background: Abiraterone acetate (AA) improves OS and rPFS in first line mCRPC patients (pts). After AA progression D is commonly used as standard second line therapy. However, the value of maintaining AA in combination with D despite progression has not been tested beyond small exploratory studies (Tagawa ST, Eur Urol 2016) ABIDO is a randomized-phase II trial that evaluates efficacy and safety of D + AA vs D after first-line AA progression in mCRPC. Methods: Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC pts with no visceral metastases, ECOG PS 0-1, and adequate organ functions were included. The study has two stages: In stage I pts receive AA (1000 mg/d + prednisone (P) 10 mg qd) until radiological or unequivocal clinical progression. In stage II pts were randomized to D 75 mg/m2 q3wk in combination with AA 1000 mg/d (arm A) or without AA (arm B) The primary endpoint was rPFS and the secondary endpoints radiological response (RR), OS, PSA-response, PSA-PFS and safety. Results: 88 pts were randomized, (46 arm A, 42 Arm B). Median age was 69 y/o, 43% had ECOG 0 and 91%/11%/5% had bone, liver and lung metastases. Median rPFS was 11.4 months (m) in arm A vs 10.5 m in ARM B; 12-m rPFS was 43% vs 45%; Median PSA PFS was 6.2 vs 5.5 m and median OS was 17.3 vs 16.9 m. Twenty four pts (52%) in arm A and 19 (46%) in arm B achieve ≥50% PSA response. RR was achieved in 15% vs 7% of pts and disease control rate in 74% in both arms. No statistically significant differences were found in efficacy parameters. Half of pts received 10 cycles of D (median 7 and 8). D median dose intensity was 86% and 90% for each arm and 91% for AA. Eleven pts discontinued treatment due to non-hematological toxicity, 5 in arm A and 6 in arm B. Most frequent G3-4 toxicities per arm (A/B) were: neutropenia (57%/29%; P=0.027), febrile neutropenia (17%/10%), diarrhea (9%/7%), and asthenia (11%/10%). Conclusions: ABIDO trial was unable to demonstrate the significant clinical benefit of maintenance AA approach + D after AA first-line therapy. No differences were observed in RR, PSA PFS, rPFS and OS. In AA + D cohort, more frequent and severe hematological toxicity (neutropenia and febrile neutropenia) were reported. Clinical trial information: NCT02036060.

Androgen deprivation treatment was the only treatment available for metastatic prostate cancer until recently, with docetaxel as the only treatment with a proven survival benefit in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Several drugs have been approved in the castration-resistant disease (sipuleucel-T, cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, radium-223). More recently, docetaxel and abiraterone have been moved to the hormone-sensitive disease setting, achieving better patient survival. The purpose of this article is to define the state of the art in the treatment of prostate carcinoma.

The original article shows two mistakes, which are listed here.

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent male urogenital malignancy. Approximately 30% of patients with prostate cancer will develop advanced disease. Androgen deprivation therapy achieves disease control in about 90% of these patients, but the majority of them will eventually develop progressive disease, a status called castration-resistant prostate carcinoma (CRPC). However, in recent years, several new therapy strategies, such as immunotherapy, hormonal manipulations, chemotherapy agents and some bone-targeted therapies, have demonstrated an improvement in terms of overall survival in controlled trials. In 2012, the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) published its recommendations for the treatment of patients with CRPC. Due to the recent appearance of important new data and the complexity of decision-making in this field, SOGUG herein provides updated recommendations for the treatment of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most prevalent malignancy in men and the second cause of mortality in industrialized countries. Based on Spanish Register of PCa, the incidence of high-risk PCa is 29%, approximately. In spite of the evidence-based beneficial effect of radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy in high-risk PCa, these patients (pts) are still a therapeutic challenge for all specialists involved, in part due to the absence of comparative studies to establish which of the present disposable treatments offer better results. Nowadays, high-risk PCa definition is not well consensual through the published oncology guides. Clinical stage, tumour grade, and number of risk factors are relevant to be considered on PCa prognosis. However, these factors are susceptible to change depending on when surgical or radiation therapy is considered to be the treatment of choice. Other factors, such as reference pathologist, different diagnosis biopsy schedules, surgical or radiotherapy techniques, adjuvant treatments, biochemical failures, and follow-up, make it difficult to compare the results between different therapeutic options. This article reviews important issues concerning high-risk PCa. URONCOR, GUO, and SOGUG on behalf of the Spanish Groups of Uro-Oncology Societies have reached a consensus addressing a practical recommendation on definition, diagnosis, and management of high-risk PCa.

BACKGROUND: ExteNET showed that 1 year of neratinib, an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor, significantly improves 2-year invasive disease-free survival after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in women with HER2-positive breast cancer. We report updated efficacy outcomes from a protocol-defined 5-year follow-up sensitivity analysis and long-term toxicity findings. METHODS: In this ongoing randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, eligible women aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan) with stage 1-3c (modified to stage 2-3c in February, 2010) operable breast cancer, who had completed neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab with no evidence of disease recurrence or metastatic disease at study entry. Patients who were eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via permuted blocks stratified according to hormone receptor status (hormone receptor-positive vs hormone receptor-negative), nodal status (0 vs 1-3 vs or ≥4 positive nodes), and trastuzumab adjuvant regimen (given sequentially vs concurrently with chemotherapy), then implemented centrally via an interactive voice and web-response system, to receive 1 year of oral neratinib 240 mg/day or matching placebo. Treatment was given continuously for 1 year, unless disease recurrence or new breast cancer, intolerable adverse events, or consent withdrawal occurred. Patients, investigators, and trial funder were masked to treatment allocation. The predefined endpoint of the 5-year analysis was invasive disease-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. ExteNET is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00878709, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between July 9, 2009, and Oct 24, 2011, 2840 eligible women with early HER2-positive breast cancer were recruited from community-based and academic institutions in 40 countries and randomly assigned to receive neratinib (n=1420) or placebo (n=1420). After a median follow-up of 5·2 years (IQR 2·1-5·3), patients in the neratinib group had significantly fewer invasive disease-free survival events than those in the placebo group (116 vs 163 events; stratified hazard ratio 0·73, 95% CI 0·57-0·92, p=0·0083). The 5-year invasive disease-free survival was 90·2% (95% CI 88·3-91·8) in the neratinib group and 87·7% (85·7-89·4) in the placebo group. Without diarrhoea prophylaxis, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the neratinib group, compared with the placebo group, were diarrhoea (561 [40%] grade 3 and one [BACKGROUND: ExteNET showed that 1 year of neratinib, an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor, significantly improves 2-year invasive disease-free survival after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in women with HER2-positive breast cancer. We report updated efficacy outcomes from a protocol-defined 5-year follow-up sensitivity analysis and long-term toxicity findings.METHODS: In this ongoing randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, eligible women aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan) with stage 1-3c (modified to stage 2-3c in February, 2010) operable breast cancer, who had completed neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab with no evidence of disease recurrence or metastatic disease at study entry. Patients who were eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via permuted blocks stratified according to hormone receptor status (hormone receptor-positive vs hormone receptor-negative), nodal status (0 vs 1-3 vs or ≥4 positive nodes), and trastuzumab adjuvant regimen (given sequentially vs concurrently with chemotherapy), then implemented centrally via an interactive voice and web-response system, to receive 1 year of oral neratinib 240 mg/day or matching placebo. Treatment was given continuously for 1 year, unless disease recurrence or new breast cancer, intolerable adverse events, or consent withdrawal occurred. Patients, investigators, and trial funder were masked to treatment allocation. The predefined endpoint of the 5-year analysis was invasive disease-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. ExteNET is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00878709, and is closed to new participants.FINDINGS: Between July 9, 2009, and Oct 24, 2011, 2840 eligible women with early HER2-positive breast cancer were recruited from community-based and academic institutions in 40 countries and randomly assigned to receive neratinib (n=1420) or placebo (n=1420). After a median follow-up of 5·2 years (IQR 2·1-5·3), patients in the neratinib group had significantly fewer invasive disease-free survival events than those in the placebo group (116 vs 163 events; stratified hazard ratio 0·73, 95% CI 0·57-0·92, p=0·0083). The 5-year invasive disease-free survival was 90·2% (95% CI 88·3-91·8) in the neratinib group and 87·7% (85·7-89·4) in the placebo group. Without diarrhoea prophylaxis, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the neratinib group, compared with the placebo group, were diarrhoea (561 [40%] grade 3 and one [INTERPRETATION: At the 5-year follow-up, 1 year of extended adjuvant therapy with neratinib, administered after chemotherapy and trastuzumab, significantly reduced the proportion of clinically relevant breast cancer relapses-ie, those that might lead to death, such as distant and locoregional relapses outside the preserved breast-without increasing the risk of long-term toxicity. An analysis of overall survival is planned after 248 events.FUNDING: Wyeth, Pfizer, and Puma Biotechnology.

[ES] Un grupo de expertos de la Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica (SEIMC) y de la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica (SEOM) han revisado en este documento los principales aspectos que deben considerarse en la evaluación de los pacientes con cáncer sólido y complicaciones infecciosas. Para ello se han establecido unas recomendaciones sobre la profilaxis de las infecciones más prevalentes en estos pacientes, el uso de vacunas, las medidas de control de la infección por catéteres vasculares y la prevención de la infección ante determinadas maniobras quirúrgicas. A continuación, se han revisado los criterios de manejo de la neutropenia febril y del uso de factores estimulantes de colonias, para terminar dando una serie de pautas sobre el tratamiento del paciente oncológico con infección grave. El documento se completa con una serie de medidas para el control de la infección hospitalaria., [EN] A group of experts from the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) have reviewed in this paper the main aspects to be considered in the evaluation of patients with solid cancer and infectious diseases. They have established a series of recommendations on the prevention of the most prevalent infections in these patients, the use of vaccines, the control measures of vascular catheter infection and prevention of infections before certain surgical procedures. Also the criteria for management of febrile neutropenia and the use of colony-stimulating factors were revised. Finally they provide a series of recommendations for the treatment of cancer patients with severe infection. The document is completed with a series of measures for the control of hospital infection.

Patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) preferred subcutaneous (s.c.) trastuzumab, delivered via single-use injection device (SID), over the intravenous (i.v.) formulation (Cohort 1 of the PrefHer study: NCT01401166). Here, we report patient preference, healthcare professional satisfaction, and safety data pooled from Cohort 1 and also Cohort 2, where s.c. trastuzumab was delivered via hand-held syringe.Patients were randomized to receive four adjuvant cycles of 600 mg fixed-dose s.c. trastuzumab followed by four cycles of standard i.v. trastuzumab, or vice versa. The primary endpoint was overall preference proportions for s.c. or i.v., assessed by patient interviews in the evaluable ITT population.A total of 245 patients were randomized to receive s.c. followed by i.v. and 243 received i.v. followed by s.c. (evaluable ITT populations: 235 and 232 patients, respectively). s.c. was preferred by 415/467 [88.9%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 85.7-91.6; P0.0001; two-sided test against null hypothesis of 65% s.c. preference]; 45/467 preferred i.v. (9.6%; 95% CI 7-13); 7/467 indicated no preference (1.5%; 95% CI 1-3). Clinician-reported adverse events occurred in 292/479 (61.0%) and 245/478 (51.3%) patients during the pooled s.c. and i.v. periods, respectively (P0.05; 2 × 2 χ(2)); 16 patients (3.3%) in each period experienced grade 3 events; none were grade 4/5.PrefHer revealed compelling and consistent patient preferences for s.c. over i.v. trastuzumab, regardless of SID or hand-held syringe delivery. s.c. was well tolerated and safety was consistent with previous reports, including the HannaH study (NCT00950300). No new safety signals were identified compared with the known i.v. profile in EBC. PrefHer and HannaH confirm that s.c. trastuzumab is a validated and preferred option over i.v. for improving patients' care in HER2-positive breast cancer.NCT01401166.

Objetivo Evaluar la eficiencia de los agentes estimuladores de la eritropoyesis (AEE) en el manejo de la anemia inducida por quimioterapia en Espana, que afecta hasta al 68% de los pacientes tratados con quimioterapia en Europa.

Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common cancer in men. Many patients have prolonged survival and die of other diseases, so treatment decisions are often influenced by age and coexisting comorbidities. The main procedure to diagnose PC is an ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy, which is indicated when a digital rectal examination (DRE) finds nodularity or when PSA is >10 ng/ml, but is also recommended with PSA between 4.0 and 10 ng/ml. Depending on age, PSA, Gleason score and characteristics of the tumour, treatment options for localised PC are active surveillance, radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy. Androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) should be added to radiotherapy for men with intermediate- or high-risk PC. ADT is the current standard first-line treatment for metastatic PC. Castration-resistant PC is a heterogeneous entity. Several treatments such as sipuleucel-T, docetaxel-based chemotherapy, radium 223, cabazitaxel or abiraterone plus prednisone, zoledronic and denosumab, are useful for this situation.

Background Despite effective analgesic therapy, inadequate pain control is frequently perceived by patients and caregivers. Aims To assess satisfaction with management of pain in cancer patients. Methods Between January and May 2007, a cross-sectional multicentre study was conducted in 64 Medical Oncology Departments throughout Spain. A total of 525 outpatients with oncological diseases completed a questionnaire with demographic data, characteristics and intensity of pain, and perceptions and attitudes towards pain management at the time of a routine clinical visit. Physicians also completed a questionnaire with tumour-related and treatment-related data. Cluster analysis was used to classify patients into three groups (satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied or neutral, dissatisfied) according to pain intensity and satisfaction with treatment. Results Patients satisfied with their analgesic treatment (33%) had lower pain intensities and, when regularly asked about their pain, considered their physicians to be more involved in their treatment. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied patients (neutral) (44%) had higher mean pain intensities. Two-thirds of them achieved marked relief of their pain and also thought that physicians were aware of their situation. Dissatisfied patients (23%) had moderate to severe pain intensities, and said that they were asked less frequently about their pain, and thought that their physicians were less involved in their analgesic treatment. Conclusion Physician–patient communication and information provided to patients are essential aspects of patient perceptions and attitudes towards control of cancer-related pain. Pain is seen as a condition that may be controlled but affects the capacity to lead a normal life.

Recently, metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatment has changed dramatically with the onset of new therapies against molecular targets replacing immunotherapy as standard treatment. We report the case of a 49-year-old patient with a moderately differentiated renal clear cell carcinoma without extracapsular extension who underwent radical nephrectomy. Eight months after surgery, he developed a thyroid metastasis which was also treated surgically with a hemithyroidectomy. Seventy-five months after nephrectomy, the patient presented an upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to a duodenal metastasis that infiltrates the head of the pancreas. The treatment applied was surgery by duodenopancreatectomy, with positive surgical margins in the pathologic study. In addition to this, the extension study showed lung metastases requiring initiation of systemic treatment with sunitinib. The patient presented an excellent response to treatment, showing complete clinical and radiological response at 5 months of treatment (RECIST criteria) and a disease-free survival of 48 months until now, without evidence of toxicity. RCC has the potential to metastasize to almost any location, but thyroid and duodenal metastases in RCC are extremely rare. Moreover, this case also highlights the good responses that can be achieved in terms of disease-free survival, low toxicity and quality of life in this new era of therapies against molecular targets.

Conventional chemotherapy increases progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients versus best supportive care (BSC). However, the efficacy of chemotherapy is limited. Recently approved monoclonal antibodies (MoAb) have a different mechanism of action, targeting growth factors or their receptors. Panitumumab is a fully human IgG2 MoAb directed against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In phase II trials, panitumumab showed preliminary activity in chemorefractory mCRC. This efficacy was confirmed in a randomized pivotal phase III trial, which compared single-agent panitumumab plus BSC versus BSC alone. Several ongoing clinical trials are evaluating panitumumab in combination with different chemotherapy regimens in first- and second-line settings. Skin toxicities, hypomagnesemia, and diarrhea are the most common adverse events associated with anti-EGFR therapy. KRAS status and skin rash have been correlated with panitumumab efficacy. This article reviews the preclinical and pharmacokinetics data, activity and tolerance of panitumumab in mCRC patients. Potential predictive factors of response are also discussed.

Treatment of anaemia is a very important aspect in the management of cancer patients. In order to carry out a consensus process about the use of erythropoietic stimulating agents (ESAs) in cancer patients, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) elaborated a working group which coordinated a panel of medical oncology specialists. This working group has reviewed the main issues about the use of ESAs. In addition a consensus meeting was held in Madrid on 25 April 2007. The following conclusions were made: Since ESA treatment increases the haemoglobin (Hb) level and decreases the red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirements, ESAs should be used within the approved indications in patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment, beginning at a Hb level below 11 g/dl and maintaining it around 12 g/dl, with iron supplements if necessary. Neither increasing the ESA dose in non-responders nor the use of ESAs in the treatment of chronic cancer-related anaemia is recommended.

Colorectal cancer is the third most frequent malignant neoplasm in Western countries. After complete resection, 5-year overall survival varies according to the initial stage. Adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) is indicated in patients with colon cancer at high-risk stage II, stage III and after complete resection of metastases. 5-Fluorouracil (5FU), alone or modulated with levamisol or leucovorin (LV), oral fluoropyrimidines, raltitrexed, irinotecan and oxaliplatin have been studied as adjuvant therapy for colon cancer. Nowadays, oxaliplatin-based regimens, FOLFOX or FLOX, are considered as the standard adjuvant CT. If there are contraindications for oxaliplatin, the best alternatives are capecitabine or continuous infusion of 5FU/LV. The role of monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab and bevacizumab, combined with oxaliplatin/fluoropyrimidine-based CT is under investigation in clinical trials. This article reviews the state of the art and the future perspectives of adjuvant therapy in colon cancer. Prognostic and predictive factors are also commented on.

A patient with inflammatory breast carcinoma (IBC) diagnosed in the left breast responded to cisplatin and was treated with radical mastectomy and adjuvant therapy. Two years later C-erbB2-positive IBC was diagnosed in the right breast, and was treated with mastectomy and radiotherapy. Two years later skin metastases appeared, and trastuzumab was started initially as monotherapy, and later with paclitaxel and capecitabine. More than 12 years after diagnosis and 7 years after trastuzumab was started, the patient remains in complete clinical remission on trastuzumab and capecitabine.

Ovarian and cervical cancers are significant health problems. This article provides an update in selected management topics. Paclitaxel and platinum derivatives are the first-line treatment for patients with advanced disease. In selected patients, intraperitoneal chemotherapy has been associated with improved survival but the broad applicability of this strategy is limited by issues of toxicity and feasibility. Management of patients with recurrent disease is based on a number of factors and includes surgery in selected cases, platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with platinum-sensitive disease and other agents such as topotecan and pegylated liposomal formulation of doxorubicin for patients with platinum-resistant disease. In cervical cancer, the most significant issue/event is the demonstration of superior survival with topotecan and cisplatin compared to cisplatin alone. Finally, new agents such as epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors and antiangiogenic agents are being currently tested in these settings.

Aim Studies in some countries suggest that cancer pain is often not adequately controlled, but little is known about the situation in Spain. The objective of this study was to identify medical oncologists’ perceptions about pain management in their patients. Methods Two-round Delphi survey of 24 medical oncologists from 22 large, geographically diverse hospitals in Spain. Physicians rated each of 150 statements on a Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). The mean, standard deviation and frequency of replies in three agreement categories were calculated for each item. Statements allowing comparison of oncologists’ perceptions of how pain is managed in routine clinical practice with how it should be managed were grouped together and analyzed. Results The most notable discrepancies between the real and the ideal occurred in the failure to provide written information or to confirm that patients understand what they are told, the lack of comprehensive and systematic evaluation of pain, and the lack of use of non-pharmacological treatments (NPTs) for cancer pain. Conclusions Medical oncologists need to improve their communication skills, providing patients with both written and verbal information about their disease and the plan for pain management. Pain should be evaluated at each patient visit using validated scales, and greater attention should be paid to the possible use of NPTs.

An expert group from the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC, for its acronym in Spanish) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM, for its acronym in Spanish) have reviewed the main aspects to be considered when evaluating patients with solid cancer and infectious complications contained in this article. Recommendations have, therefore, been put forth regarding the prophylaxis of the most prevalent infections in these patients, the use of vaccines, measures to control infection through vascular catheters, and preventing infection in light of certain surgical maneuvers. The following is a revision of the criteria for febrile neutropenia management and the use of colony-stimulating factors and closes with several guidelines for treating the cancer patient with serious infection. The document concludes with a series of measures to control hospital infection.

Background: More than 429,000 patients worldwide are diagnosed with bladder cancer each year and muscle-invasive bladder cancer has an especially poor outcome. The median age at diagnosis is over 70 years, and many patients also have a substantial number of age-associated impairments that need to be considered when planning therapeutic interventions. Case presentation: Here, we report the case of a 63-year-old man with a cT3b urothelial carcinoma which was surgically removed. No neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy was administered. After 18 months a lung metastasis was confirmed and resected but no chemotherapy was given after surgery. Twelve months later, the patient relapsed and was treated with a combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin and after a decline in renal function the treatment was changed to a combination of carboplatin and gemcitabine which resulted in a partial response which lasted 8 months. Following this vinflunine was administered as a second line treatment. Here we review the evidence available in the literature regarding the suitability of different treatment options for managing muscle-invasive bladder cancer at each step of the case presentation. Conclusion: Bladder cancer treatment requires a multidisciplinary approach. Although, depending on the clinical characteristics of the patient, there are some controversial points in the management of this pathology we hope that the scientific data and the clinical trials reviewed in this case report, can help to guide physicians to make more rational decisions regarding the management of these patients.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the antitumor activity and toxicity of fixed sequences of capecitabine/oxaliplatin followed by capecitabine/irinotecan in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods Adult patients with histologically confirmed, previously untreated, nonresectable, locally advanced or metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma were enrolled in the study. Patients were treated as follows: capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily) on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin (130 mg/m2 2-hour intravenous infusion) on day 1, followed by capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 twice daily) on days 1–14 and irinotecan (240 mg/m2 1.5-hour intravenous infusion) on day 1. Each combination was administered every 21 days during 4 consecutive cycles followed by the alternating sequence to a maximum of 16 cycles. Results A total of 35 eligible patients have been included in this ongoing study. Response rate (complete responses plus partial responses) was 37.1%. With a median follow-up of 9.5 months, the median time to disease progression and overall survival were 7.4 months and 16.4 months, respectively. Treatment was well tolerated, with only 6% of the patients developing grade 3/4 neurotoxicity. However, the low number of patients treated beyond 4 cycles limits the interpretation of the data. Conclusion The preliminary results from this ongoing study suggest the feasibility of this strategy, which resulted in promising antitumor activity with less neurotoxicity.

Introduccion. El citrato de fentanilo oral transmucosa (CFOT) es el unico farmaco desarrollado especificamente para el tratamiento del dolor irruptivo (DI). Este estudio evalua la seguridad y efectividad a largo plazo del CFOT en condiciones asistenciales habituales. Pacientes y metodos. Estudio observacional de 6 meses de duracion, realizado en pacientes oncologicos con crisis de DI. Se evaluo la seguridad del farmaco recogiendo las reacciones adversas y su efectividad, midiendo intensidad y tiempo de respuesta del episodio de DI por el paciente. Resultados. Participaron 174 pacientes. Las reacciones adversas recogidas fueron leves o moderadas. El CFOT fue significativamente mas rapido (tiempo hasta alivio del dolor: 12,7±11,4 minutos frente a 32,7±18,4 minutos; p

This study was designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of oxaliplatin combined with weekly boluses of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and low doses of leucovorin (LV) and to determine objective response, progression-free survival, and overall survival of patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer. Seventy-nine patients enrolled in an observational, multicenter, prospective, open-label phase II study received intravenous (I.V.) infusions of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 over the course of 2 hours on days 1 and 14 and LV 20 mg/m 2 over the course of 2 hours and 5-FU 500 mg/m 2 as a bolus on days 1, 7, and 14 every 4 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred. Seventy-nine patients were evaluable for safety, and data from 70 patients were used for efficacy analysis. The objective response rate was 51.4%. Complete responses occurred in 7 patients (10%), and partial responses occurred in 29 patients (41.4%). Disease control, defined as response or stable disease, was obtained in 56 of 70 patients (80%). The median duration of response was 8.34 weeks (range, 7.3-11.5 weeks). The median time to progression was 7.13 months (range, 6.28–7.72 months), and median overall survival time was 15 months (range, 12.32-18.37 months). Acute dose-limiting toxicities were grade 3/4 diarrhea and neutropenia, which occurred in 10.5% and 3.9% of patients, respectively. Among the 70 patients who experienced neurosensory toxicity, it was estimated that only 1.3% had grade 3 symptoms. Preliminary data showed that the regimen is at least as active as other regimens combining oxaliplatin and infusional schedules of 5-FU and might be more convenient for patients because it avoids the need for I.V. catheter implantation.

e15150 Background: The sensitive, symmetric, chronic neurotoxicity is a frequent dose-dependent and dose-limiting secondary effect of oxaliplatin (COXALIN). Time-event and long-term studies about COXALIN and its progression after the end of treatment ( coasting) are lacking. Methods: A prospective, translational, clinical and neurophysiologic study was performed in patients (p) with CRC treated with oxaliplatin. We analyzed COXALIN during and after treatment (at the time of initial, maximum coasting, improvement and maximum improvement). We followed p every 3 months the first year and every 6 months thereafter. The NCI-CTC V3.0 sensitive and modified TNSc (without motor and autonomic skills) clinical scales and Quantitave Sensitive Test and ENG were used. Results: 41 chemo naive p with CRC were included, 22 men, median age 60 y (IA:55-73).Oxaliplatin was administrated as adjuvant treatment in 36p. FOLFOX combination was used in 40p. The median cumulative doses was 825,25 mg/m2 (IA: 697-963). The median follow-up was 21,5m (11-27). 38 p developed COXALIN at median 5,5 m (IA: 4,4-6,6) and maximum coasting at median 8,5 m (IA: 7,6-9,5); in multivariant analysis, cumulative dose at 3 months (p = 0,039; OR 2,5; p = 0,027; HR 0,5) was predictive factor and female gender (p = 0,017; OR 0,11) was protective factor. Fine fiber neuropathy was detected in 47,4% p. All p improved at median 8,7m (IA: 7,1-10,2) since COXALIN, reaching the maximum improvement at 13,4 m (IA:16,0-20,4); on multivariate analysis, the COXALIN intensity was the predictive factor (p = 0,03; HR 0,42). 76,6%p showed residual COXALIN (73,9% p subclinical/mild, 17,4% p moderated and 8,7% p severe). A high correlation was found between clinical scales and neurophysiologic studies along the study (p < 0,0001). Sensitive NCI-CTC scale was more sensible than modified TNSc to evaluate COXALIN intensity in our study. Conclusions: We confirm coasting in COXALIN which prolongs 6 months after treatment. About 80% p showed residual COXALIN in the long-term but it was subclinical or mild in most cases. Sensitive NCI-CTC 3.0 scale is a simple and reliable method for the follow-up of COXALIN.

e16536 Background: AA improves OS and rPFS in asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic mCRPC patients. D is currently one of the standard treatments after progression to AA. However, the value of maintaining AA along with D despite progression to AA has not been tested. ABIDO trial aims to evaluate efficacy and safety of AA + D maintenance after disease progression to first line AA in mCRPC. Clinicopathologic features associated with rPFS during first line AA are presented. Methods: ABIDO trial is a randomized, phase II, open-label study with two stages. In stage I pts receive AA (1000 mg + prednisone (P) 10 mg qd) until progressive disease. In the stage II pts will be randomized to receive three-weekly D 75 mg/m2plus P 10 mg/d with (arm A) or without (arm B) AA 1000 mg/d. Pts had no visceral metastases, ECOG PS 0-1, and adequate organ functions. Clinicopathological predictors for rPFS to first line AA were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and independent associations were evaluated using Cox regression models. Results: 143 pts were included. Analyzed variables were: median age was 70y, 60% of pts had ECOG 0, 84% bone metastases (18% > 4), 42% BPI score 2-3, 53% Gleason > = 8, 30% PSA > 80 ng/mL, 38% node involvement and 11% had at least one lymph node > = 3 cm; 53% of pts achieved 4 weeks PSA reduction > 50%.Median rPFS was 18 months. Univariate analysis identified as significant variables: PSA, BPI, Gleason, node involvement, 4 weeks PSA reduction > 50%, and total volume of lymph node metastasis. On multivariate analysis, BPI (0-1 vs 2-3) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.81; p = 0.039), Gleason ( < 8 vs > = 8) (HR 2.51; p = 0.005), node involvement (no nodes, nodes < 3 cm and at least 1 node > = 3 cm (HR 2.8; p = 0.001 and 3.57; p = 0.009) and PSA reduction > 50% (HR 3.06; p < 0.001) were independently associated with rPFS. Median rPFS was superior in pts with 3 or more good prognostic factors (14m vs not reached; p < 0.001). Conclusions: BPI, Gleason, node involvement and 4-week PSA response were identified as independent prognostic factors for rPFS in first line AA treated patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02036060.

e16504 Background: In the CHAARTED and STAMPEDE clinical trials, Docetaxel combined with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) increased overall survival in mHSPC patients. Despite the increasing use of this strategy in clinical practice, there is a lack of information about the best treatment choice after progression. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 96 patients with mHSPC treated with Docetaxel plus ADT in 18 Spanish centers (July 2014 to December 2016). The objectives of the study were to describe baseline and progression characteristics, as well as second-line treatment choice and its outcomes. Results: The median age was 66.7 years. 33.3% patients had visceral metastases at diagnosis and 81% had a Gleason Score 8-10. After a median follow-up of 12.2 months, 35.4% of patients developed castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). The median time to CRPC was 15.4 months. 36.3% of patients had visceral progressive disease. 27 patients received subsequent treatment after progression: 9 (33.3%) were treated with chemotherapy (2 docetaxel, 6 cabazitaxel, 1 carboplatin-etoposide), and 18 (66.6%) received androgen receptor axis-targeted agents (12 enzalutamide, 6 abiraterone). Median progression-free survival was similar with hormonal therapies (4.3 months) than chemotherapy (3.5 months) as second line. Treatment choice was influenced by pattern of progression (visceral vs non visceral) and time to develop CRPC (≤ 12 vs > 12 months). Hormonal therapies were more frequent for non-visceral disease (75% vs 25%) or patients with longer time to develop CRPC (89% vs 11%). Chemotherapy was preferred in patients with visceral progressive disease (83.3% vs 16.7%). In patients with a time to CRPC less than 12 months both treatments were used equally (44.5 vs 55.5%). Conclusions: In our cohort, androgen receptor axis-targeted agents were used more frequently than chemotherapy after progression to chemo-hormonal therapy. Despite the low number of patients that received treatment at progression, our results suggest that the characteristics at the time of progression, such as pattern of progression and time to develop CRPC, could influence treatment choice.

213 Background: Despite the attempts made to improve prostate cancer management with the development and implementation of clinical practice guidelines, the inefficiencies and differences that usually occur in ordinary clinical care of patients with prostate cancer significantly contribute to increase the variations in the patterns of care and patients outcomes, and costs to the health system. The goal of this project was to establish parameters for improving the care of patients with prostate cancer through the development and validation of quality indicators for the management of this disease. Methods: The ECO Foundation is a platform of experts representing the major Spanish hospitals involved in the treatment of cancer patients. A multidisciplinary group of experts supported by ECO, extracted potential indicators for prostate cancer care from the relevant medical literature. After two consecutive rounds of rating in a modified Delphi approach, followed by a consensus discussion, the expert panel prioritized the indicators selected. Results: Forty indicators were selected with a high level of agreement. They were grouped into four main groups: general, localized disease, metastasized disease, and results-related indicators. Only two indicators did not reach an agreement or disagreement. The indicators with the highest level of agreement ( > 95%) were the appropriateness of diagnostic confirmation through the pathology report; patient participation in clinical decisions; complete re-staging with study of regional and bone extension; or the establishment of individual therapeutic plan with multidisciplinary participation. Conclusions: We conclude that currently available prostate cancer quality indicators represent clinical practices that are necessary for high-quality care in prostate cancer. The finalized indicator list can be directly adopted or adapted for deployment within a performance improvement program.

e568 Background: Prostate Cancer (PC) management through Multidisciplinary Committees (MDC) has demonstrated some benefits that could be relevant in patient's outcomes. In Spain MDC are widely implemented although they are not homogeneous among hospitals. The aim of the study was to design a questionnaire to evaluate the functionality/effectiveness of PC MDC in Spain. Methods: The questionnaire was developed from a literature review (22 articles included) and validated by 9 opinion leaders (3 medical oncologists, 3 urologists and 3 radiation oncologists). Experts scored each questionnaire item regarding its ability to assess MDC functionality/effectiveness to obtain a final score of each hospital (from 0-minimum to 100-best functionality/effectiveness) used to classify them according to the cluster analysis (high/intermediate/low level of functionality/effectiveness). The questionnaire was distributed to different specialties by the Spanish Societies of Urological Cancer (URONCOR, GUO and SOGUG). Results: 218 physicians answered the questionnaire, 90 medical oncologists, 86 urologists and 42 radiation oncologists, from 109 hospitals with national representativeness. 91% of hospitals had a Urological MDC, 5% a PC MDC and 4% a General Tumour Committee. Core medical specialities (Urology, Medical Oncology, Radiation Oncology, Pathology, Radiology) were represented in > 80% of MDC. Only 9% MDC discussed the treatment of all patients with PC whereas in 60% of MDC less than 50% of the whole population of PC patients were evaluated. According to 95% of physicians, agreement in therapeutic strategies were reached in > 80% of cases discussed. A score was established that allowed the classification of MDC in each center according to its functionality into 3 clusters: 43% of centers fell in cluster 3 (high), 36% in cluster 2 (intermediate) and 21% in cluster 1 (low). Conclusions: Urological Cancer MDC is a widespread practice in Spain, which comprises a wide range of medical specialists that meet regularly to agree on therapeutic strategies for PC patients. Less than 50% of total PC patients are evaluated in Urological MDC. It is still necessary to improve some aspects allowing more hospitals to reach a higher level of functionality.

BACKGROUND Although the prevalence of nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) is high among elderly patients, few data are available regarding the efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy in this group of patients. Recent reports indicate that single agent therapy with vinorelbine (VNB) or gemcitabine (GEM) may obtain a response rate of 20–30% in elderly patients, with acceptable toxicity and improvement in symptoms and quality of life. In the current study the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of GEM and VNB in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC or those with some contraindication to receiving cisplatin were assessed. METHODS Forty-nine patients with advanced NSCLC were included, 38 of whom were age ≥ 70 years and 11 were age < 70 years but who had some contraindication to receiving cisplatin. All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Treatment was comprised of VNB, 25 mg/m2, plus GEM, 1000 mg/m2, both on Days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days. Patients received a minimum of three courses unless progressive disease was detected. RESULTS One hundred sixty-five courses were administered, with a median of 3.6 courses per patient. The overall response rate was 26% (95% confidence interval, 15–41%). Two patients attained a complete response (4%) and 11 patients (22%) achieved a partial response. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status improved in 35% of those patients with an initial value > 0, whereas relief of at least 1 symptom without worsening of other symptoms was noted in 27 patients (55%). The median time to progression was 16 weeks and the 1-year survival rate was 33%. Toxicity was mild. Six patients (12%) had World Health Organization Grade 3-4 neutropenia, 2 patients (4%) had Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia, and 2 patients (4%) had Grade 3 neurotoxicity. Three patients with severe neutropenia (6%) died of sepsis. The median age of those patients developing Grade 3-4 neutropenia was significantly higher than that of the remaining patients (75 years vs. 72 years; P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS The combination of GEM and VNB is moderately active and well tolerated except in patients age ≥ 75 years. This age group had an increased risk of myelosuppression. Therefore the prophylactic use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor should be considered with this treatment. New chemotherapy combinations with higher activity and lower toxicity are needed for elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. Cancer 1999;86:1463–9. © 1999 American Cancer Society.

A phase II study was performed to assess the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of cisplatin (CDDP) and tamoxifen (TAM) in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma (MM). A total of 31 consecutive previously untreated patients with unresectable measurable MM were given 100 mg/m2 CDDP every 21 days and 60 mg TAM every 12 h daily. All courses were given on an outpatient basis. A total of 119 courses of treatment were given. In all, 5 of the 31 patients (16%) had an objective response (95% confidence interval 5.3 – 34%) and 2 (6%) achieved a clinical complete response. The median duration of response was 7 months. The main side effect was gastrointestinal: 13% of the patients experienced grade 3/4 nausea/vomiting. Hematological or neurological toxicities were mild and rare. In conclusion, the combination CDDP-TAM has limited activity in MM, although its toxicity is tolerable. Our results do not allow us to recommend its use for the treatment of MM.