Topical Diclofenac for Prevention of Capecitabine-Associated Hand-Foot Syndrome: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting side effect of capecitabine. Celecoxib prevents HFS by inhibiting cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) that is upregulated because of the underlying associated inflammation. However, systemic side effects of celecoxib have limited routine prescription. Topical diclofenac inhibits COX-2 locally with minimal risk of systemic adverse events. Therefore, we conducted this study to assess the efficacy of topical diclofenac in the prevention of capecitabine-induced HFS. METHODS: In this single-site phase III randomized double-blind trial, we enrolled patients with breast or GI cancer who were planned to receive capecitabine-based treatment. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive topical diclofenac or placebo gel for 12 weeks or until the development of HFS, whichever occurred earlier. The primary end point was the incidence of grade 2 or 3 HFS (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5), which was compared between the two groups using simple logistic regression. RESULTS: In total, 264 patients were randomly assigned to receive topical diclofenac gel (n = 131) or placebo (n = 133). Grade 2 or 3 HFS was observed in 3.8% of participants in the diclofenac group compared with 15.0% in the placebo group (absolute difference, 11.2%; 95% CI, 4.3 to 18.1; P = .003). Grade 1-3 HFS was lower in the diclofenac group than in the placebo group (6.1% v 18.1%; absolute risk difference, 11.9%; 95% CI, 4.1 to 19.6). Capecitabine dose reductions because of HFS were less frequent in the diclofenac group (3.8%) than in the placebo group (13.5%; absolute risk difference, 9.7%; 95% CI, 3.0 to 16.4). CONCLUSION: Topical diclofenac prevented HFS in patients receiving capecitabine. This trial supports the use of topical diclofenac to prevent capecitabine-associated HFS.

Quality of life assessment in testicular non-seminomatous germ cell tumour survivors.

PURPOSE: Patients with Germ cell tumours (GCT) are at risk of long-term toxicities due to multimodality therapy. It is debatable whether there is an impact on the quality of life(QoL) of GCT survivors. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted at a tertiary care centre in India, using the EORTC QLQ C30 questionnaire, to compare the QoL between GCT survivors(disease free > 2 years) and healthy matched controls. A multivariate regression model was used to identify factors affecting QoL. RESULTS: A total of 55 cases and 100 controls were recruited. Cases had a median age of 32 years (interquartile range, IQR 28-40 years), ECOG PS of 0-1(75%), advanced stage III (58%), chemotherapy (94%) and 66% were > 5 years from diagnosis. The median age of controls: 35 years (IQR 28-43 years). A statistically significant difference was seen for emotional (85.8 ± 14.2 vs 91.7 ± 10.4, p 0.005), social(83.0 ± 22.0 vs 95.2 ± 9.6, p < 0.001) and global scales (80.4 ± 21.1 vs 91.3 ± 9.7, p < 0.001). Cases had more nausea and vomiting(3.3 ± 7.4 vs 1.0 ± 3.9, p 0.015), pain(13.9 ± 13.9 vs 4.8 ± 9.8, p < 0.001), dyspnea(7.9 + 14.3 vs 2.7 ± 9.1, p 0.007), and appetite loss(6.7 ± 14.9 vs 1.9 ± 7.9, p 0.016) and greater financial toxicity(31.5 ± 32.3 vs 9.0 ± 16.3, p < 0.001). Adjusting for age, performance status, BMI, stage, chemotherapy, RPLND, recurrent disease, and time since diagnosis, no predictive variables were significant. CONCLUSION: There is a detrimental impact of history of GCT in long term survivors of GCT.

Metastatic sclerosing epithelioid fibrosarcoma in an adult male from a tertiary care centre in India: a case report.

Background: Sclerosing epithelioid fibrosarcoma (SEF) is an extremely rare subtype of soft tissue sarcoma and the data from India is sparse. It is an unusual variant of fibrosarcoma that commonly arises in the soft tissues of the limb, head and neck, trunk and occasionally in the visceral organs and bones. This entity is commonly reported in the middle age group, men and women alike. Pathological clinchers include MUC 4 (Mucin 4, cell surface associated) positivity by immunohistochemistry, FUS-CREB3L1 fusion and EWSR1 rearrangement. This disease is notoriously known for its local recurrence and metastatic spread. Response to systemic therapy is poor and relapses are frequent. The role of targeted and immunotherapy is not well defined. Case presentation: Here we report a 46-year-old gentleman who presented to the Sarcoma Medical Oncology Clinic in our centre. He had primary involvement of right pubic bone with metastasis to liver, lung and diffuse lytic bony lesions. His diagnosis was reviewed multiple times before coming to final diagnosis of SEF. His molecular test for EWSR1 rearrangement was positive by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation. He did not respond to palliative doxorubicin, pazopanib and gemcitabine and docetaxel. Conclusion: Through this case report, we would like to highlight the rarity of this sarcoma, its classical pathological features, its close relationship to low-grade fibromyxoid sarcoma and the limited therapeutic options available. Hence, there is a need for further research in this entity.

Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of topical diclofenac in the prevention of hand-foot syndrome in patients receiving capecitabine (the D-TORCH study).

INTRODUCTION: Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a common cutaneous side effect of capecitabine therapy. Apart from oral cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor (celecoxib), there are no proven strategies for the prevention of HFS. However, celecoxib is associated with significant cardiotoxicity. To date, no study has evaluated the role of topical COX inhibitor, diclofenac. In this study, we aim to compare topical 1% diclofenac gel with placebo in the prevention of capecitabine-induced HFS. METHODS: This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group superiority trial: the Diclofenac Topical in Reducing Capecitabine induced HFS (D-TORCH) study. A total of 264 patients with breast and gastrointestinal malignancies will be randomly allocated (stratified by sex and type of therapy [monotherapy or combination regimen with capecitabine]) to receive either 1% topical diclofenac or placebo that will be applied over the palmar and dorsal surface of the hands twice daily whilst taking capecitabine for 12 weeks. The patients will be followed up until the end of four cycles. The primary objective of this study is to compare the effect of topical diclofenac with placebo in preventing HFS (incidence of NCI CTCAEv5.0 grade 2 or higher HFS). The secondary objective is to compare the effect of topical diclofenac with placebo on preventing all grades of HFS (incidence of NCI CTCv5.0 all grade HFS), time to develop HFS (from the start of capecitabine), patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (HF-HRQoL questionnaire), adherence with the application (self-reported), capecitabine dose changes (number of patients with dose modifications due to HFS) and safety profile (NCICTCv5.0 all grade HFS) DISCUSSION: The D-TORCH study aims to determine if 1% topical diclofenac reduces the incidence of grade 2 or higher HFS in patients receiving capecitabine. To date, there have been a lot of trials for hand-foot syndrome prevention using agents like pyridoxine, vitamin E, carvedilol, and various polyherbal formulations, but none has been found successful. If the trial meets the primary end point, 1% topical diclofenac will be the new standard of care for HFS prevention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry of India  CTRI/2021/01/030592 . Prospectively registered on January 19, 2021.

Carbamazepine versus levetiracetam in epilepsy due to neurocysticercosis.

BACKGROUND: The choice of antiepileptic drug (AED) in newly diagnosed neurocysticercosis (NCC) patients with epilepsy continues to be arbitrary. We compared efficacy and side effect profile of levetiracetam (LEV) and carbamazepine (CBZ) for the treatment of seizures in newly diagnosed patients with NCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an open-labeled randomized comparative monotherapy study including newly diagnosed drug naïve patients of NCC (n = 99) presenting with seizures who were randomized in 1:1 ratio using computed generated numbers. All patients were followed up for at least six months after start of treatment. The primary outcome measure was seizure control over six months following start of AEDs. RESULTS: Fifteen (15.2%) patients [CBZ- 4(8.2%); LEV- 11(22%)] developed recurrence of seizures. A trend (p = 0.09) was found toward better control of seizures in CBZ compared to LEV. Two (4%) patients in LEV group and 17 (34.6%) patients in CBZ group developed drug-related minor side effects (p < 0.0001). Three patients in CBZ group needed discontinuation of therapy due to skin rash. Eleven patients who relapsed while on LEV did not have any recurrence of seizures after switching over to CBZ. Out of 3 patients who relapsed while receiving CBZ and were changed to LEV, two developed seizures during follow-up. CONCLUSION: CBZ and LEV could be used as alternatives in newly diagnosed patients of NCC at the behest of minor side effects in the CBZ group.