Usefulness of bone turnover markers as predictors of mortality risk, disease progression and skeletal-related events appearance in patients with prostate cancer with bone metastases following treatment with zoledronic acid: TUGAMO study.

BACKGROUND: Owing to the limited validity of clinical data on the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) and bone metastases, biochemical markers are a promising tool for predicting survival, disease progression and skeletal-related events (SREs) in these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive capacity of biochemical markers of bone turnover for mortality risk, disease progression and SREs in patients with PCa and bone metastases undergoing treatment with zoledronic acid (ZA). METHODS: This was an observational, prospective and multicenter study in which ninety-eight patients were included. Patients were treated with ZA (4 mg every 4 weeks for 18 months). Data were collected at baseline and 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 months after the beginning of treatment. Serum levels of bone alkaline phosphtase (BALP), aminoterminal propeptide of procollagen type I (P1NP) and beta-isomer of carboxiterminal telopeptide of collagen I (ß-CTX) were analysed at all points in the study. Data on disease progression, SREs development and survival were recorded. RESULTS: Cox regression models with clinical data and bone markers showed that the levels of the three markers studied were predictive of survival time, with ß-CTX being especially powerful, in which a lack of normalisation in visit 1 (3 months after the beginning of treatment) showed a 6.3-times more risk for death than in normalised patients. Levels of these markers were also predictive for SREs, although in this case BALP and P1NP proved to be better predictors. We did not find any relationship between bone markers and disease progression. CONCLUSION: In patients with PCa and bone metastases treated with ZA, ß-CTX and P1NP can be considered suitable predictors for mortality risk, while BALP and P1NP are appropriate for SREs. The levels of these biomarkers 3 months after the beginning of treatment are especially important.

Randomized phase II study of fulvestrant plus palbociclib or placebo in endocrine-sensitive, hormone receptor-positive/HER2-advanced breast cancer: GEICAM/2014-12 (FLIPPER).

BACKGROUND: The potential benefit of adding palbociclib to fulvestrant as first-line treatment in hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative endocrine-sensitive advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients remains uncharacterized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized (1:1), double-blind, phase II study, postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative ABC with de novo metastatic disease or those who relapsed after >12 months of adjuvant endocrine therapy received palbociclib/fulvestrant or placebo/fulvestrant. Stratification was based on recurrent versus de novo metastatic disease and visceral involvement. The primary objective was one-year progression-free survival (PFS-1y) rate. The sample size was 190 patients. The two-sided alpha of 0.2, 80% of power to detect a difference between the arms, assuming PFS rates of 0.695 and 0.545 for palbociclib/fulvestrant and placebo/fulvestrant, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 189 patients were randomized to palbociclib/fulvestrant ([n = 94] or placebo/fulvestrant [n = 95]). 45.5% and 60.3% of patients had de novo metastatic disease and visceral involvement, respectively. PFS-1y rates were 83.5% and 71.9% in the palbociclib/fulvestrant and placebo/fulvestrant arms, (HR 0.55, 80% CI 0.36-0.83, P = 0.064). The median PFS were 31.8 and 22.0 months for the palbociclib/fulvestrant and placebo/fulvestrant arms (aHR 0.48, 80% CI 0.37-0.64, P = 0.001). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (68.1% vs. 0%), leucopenia (26.6% vs. 0%), anemia (3.2% vs. 0%), and lymphopenia (14.9% vs. 2.1%) for the palbociclib/fulvestrant and placebo/fulvestrant, respectively. The most frequent non-hematologic grade 3-4 adverse event was fatigue (4.3% vs. 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Palbociclib/fulvestrant demonstrated better PFS-1y rates and median PFS than placebo/fulvestrant in HR-positive/HER2-negative endocrine-sensitive ABC patients.

Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin combined with gemcitabine as first-line treatment for metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer. Final results of a phase I/II trial.

Doxorubicin and gemcitabine are active as single agents in breast cancer, have different mechanisms of action, and mainly have non-overlapping side effects. Dose-dependent doxorubicin-related cardiac toxicity is the principal limitation in the metastatic setting. This open, multicenter, single-arm phase I/II study assessed the safety and activity of gemcitabine in combination with non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet), a more cardiac-friendly anthracycline, in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer. We aimed to determine the optimal recommended dose (RD) of gemcitabine combined with Myocet in a population, with performance status >or=2 and LVEF >or=50%. A formal phase II study was performed afterwards. A total of 53 patients were recruited. Gemcitabine 900 mg/m(2) intravenously day 1 and 8 combined with Myocet 55 mg/m(2) intravenously day 1, every 21 days, was the final RD. The principal toxicity observed was hematological, and 48% of patients developed grade 3-4 neutropenia. Other toxicities were mild and infrequent, including nausea and vomiting. There were no symptomatic cardiac events despite the fact that 36% of the patients had received prior treatment with adjuvant anthracyclines. Objective responses were observed in 51.1% of 47 evaluable patients (95% CI: 36-66%), including two complete response. In addition, 14 patients (29.8%) demonstrated stable disease. The combination of Myocet and gemcitabine at the RD is safe and has encouraging clinical activity in patients with advanced breast cancer, without apparent cardiac toxicity in anthracycline-pretreated patients. These data support further development of this combination.

Recommendations by the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy, the Spanish Society of Oncology Nursing and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology for the safe management of antineoplastic medication in cancer patients.

AIM: To define recommendations that permit safe management of antineoplastic medication, minimise medication errors and improve the safety of cancer patients undergoing treatment. METHODS: By reviewing the literature and consulting the websites of various health organisations and agencies, an expert committee from the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology defined a set of safe practices covering all stages of providing cancer therapy to patients. The Spanish Society of Oncology Nursing revised and endorsed the final list. RESULTS: In total, 68 recommendations arranged in five sections were defined. They include issues concerning the training of health professionals, the technological resources needed, treatment planning, informing the patient and his/her family, the processes of prescribing, preparing, dispensing and administering cancer therapy (orally, parenterally or intrathecally), assessing patient adherence and treatment toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: It is essential for healthcare establishments to implement specific measures designed to prevent medication errors, in order to ensure the safety of cancer patients treated with antineoplastic medication.

SEOM clinical guidelines on cardiovascular toxicity (2018).

One of the most common side effects of cancer treatment is cardiovascular disease, which substantially impacts long-term survivor's prognosis. Cardiotoxicity can be related with either a direct side effect of antitumor therapies or an accelerated development of cardiovascular diseases in the presence of preexisting risk factors. Even though it is widely recognized as an alarming clinical problem, scientific evidence is scarce in the management of these complications in cancer patients. Consequently, current recommendations are based on expert consensus. This Guideline represents SEOM's ongoing commitment to progressing and improving supportive care for cancer patients.

SEOM clinical guidelines on nutrition in cancer patients (2018).

Nutritional deficiency is a common medical problem that affects 15-40% of cancer patients. It negatively impacts their quality of life and can compromise treatment completion. Oncological therapies, such as surgery, radiation therapy, and drug therapies are improving survival rates. However, all these treatments can play a role in the development of malnutrition and/or metabolic alterations in cancer patients, induced by the tumor or by its treatment. Nutritional assessment of cancer patients is necessary at the time of diagnosis and throughout treatment, so as to detect nutritional deficiencies. The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment method is the most widely used tool that also evaluates nutritional requirements. In this guideline, we will review the indications of nutritional interventions as well as artificial nutrition in general and according to the type of treatment (radiotherapy, surgery, or systemic therapy), or palliative care. Likewise, pharmacological agents and pharmaconutrients will be reviewed in addition to the role of regular physical activity.

Key points to optimizing management and research on cancer-associated thrombosis.

Despite the fact that thromboembolism is relatively common in oncology patients and that the interrelationship between thrombotic risk and specific mechanisms of tumorigenesis has long been known, many cardinal elements of prevention and treatment remain unresolved. Among the existing knowledge gaps, the need to validate the Ay scale and compare it to the Khorana index, develop, and standardize the use of predictive biomarkers for thrombotic risk, conduct clinical trials in thromboprophylaxis adapted to thrombotic risk, evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct anticoagulants, select patients who can benefit from anticoagulants for antitumor treatment, validate the EPIPHANY study decision tree to choose patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism, and accumulate more practical experience in special situations (rethrombosis, prolonged therapy beyond 6 months, etc.) are especially remarkable. These gray areas surrounding cancer-related thromboembolism explain why it continues to be a relatively common cause of serious events, at times interfering significantly with the development of new tumor-fighting strategies.

Nutritional support and parenteral nutrition in cancer patients: an expert consensus report.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is a frequent medical problem of cancer patients that negatively impacts their quality of life. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of experts in Medical Oncology, Pharmacy, and Nutrition convened to discuss the management of the nutritional support in cancer patients. RESULTS: Of the 18 questions addressed, 9 focused on nutritional support, 5 were related to parenteral nutrition (PN) and 4 about home PN (HPN). The panel of experts recommends using nutritional screening routinely, at diagnosis and throughout the disease course, for detecting the risk of malnutrition and, if it is positive, to perform a complete nutritional assessment, to diagnose malnutrition. Currently, there are different screening tools and methods that allow us to detect nutritional risk. Based on the evidence and experience, the panel stated that PN is indicated mainly when it is not possible to use the digestive tract and/or oral feeding and/or enteral nutrition is not sufficient or possible. The nutritional needs of the cancer patients, except in those cases where individualized measures are required, should be considered similar to healthy individuals (25-30 kcal/kg/day). The panel considers that the nutritional monitoring of the cancer patient should be multidisciplinary and adapted to the characteristics of each center. Additionally, the objective of the HPN is to improve or maintain the nutritional status of a patient at home. CONCLUSIONS: This document seeks to lay down a set of recommendations and to identify key issues that may be useful for the nutritional management of cancer patients.

Chronic opioid therapy in long-term cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Long-term cancer survivors develop special health issues and specific needs. Chronic pain, whether the consequence of their cancer or as a side effect of treatment, is one of their most prevalent concerns. METHODS: We conducted a review of the English-language literature on long-term cancer survivorship and chronic opioid therapy, with the objective of determining the efficacy, safety and tolerability in this group of patients. Practical management recommendations are made on the basis of this review. RESULTS: Pain syndromes encountered in the long-term cancer survivors are diverse. Opioid receptor pathways possess complex and pleiotropic functions and continuous over-activation may lead to de novo endocrinopathies, immunosuppression, neurocognitive impairment, or cell cycle disturbances with potential clinical connotations. However, there are insufficient data to support evidence-based decision making with respect to patient selection, doses, administration, monitoring and follow-up. Data about long-term treatment effectiveness and safety are limited and often aggravated by the overlapping of several diseases prevalent among long-term cancer survivors, as well as chronic opiate-induced toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic opioid therapy is frequent in long-term cancer survivors, and may negatively affect the immune system, and produce health problems such as endocrinopathies, osteoporosis, neurological or cardiopulmonary effects, alterations of cell cycle kinetics, abuse and addiction. This review highlights the need for specialized teams to treat chronic pain in long-term cancer survivors from an integrative perspective.

Medical oncology future plan of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology: challenges and future needs of the Spanish oncologists.

PURPOSE: The SEOM Future Plan is aimed at identifying the main challenges, trends and needs of the medical oncology speciality over the next years, including potential oncologist workforce shortages, and proposing recommendations to overcome them. METHODS: The estimations of the required medical oncologists workforce are based on an updated Medical Oncologist Register in Spain, Medical Oncology Departments activity data, dedication times and projected cancer incidence. Challenges, needs and future recommendations were drawn from an opinion survey and an advisory board. RESULTS: A shortage of 211 FTE medical oncologist specialists has been established. To maintain an optimal ratio of 158 new cases/FTE, medical oncology workforce should reach 1881 FTE by 2035. CONCLUSIONS: Main recommendations to face the growing demand and complexity of oncology services include a yearly growth of 2.5% of medical oncologist's workforce until 2035, and development and application of more accurate quality indicators for cancer care and health outcomes measure.

SEOM Clinical Guideline for bone metastases from solid tumours (2016).

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.

SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2016).

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is one of the most worrisome adverse effects of chemotherapy for cancer patients. It can cause severe discomfort and affect the quality of life. In recent years, the incorporation of new drugs has increased the efficacy of antiemetic treatments in the control of emesis associated with chemotherapy. This guideline, in which we give some treatment recommendations with level of evidence and grade of recommendation, provides an update of the previously published guideline of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and represents our continued commitment to improving supportive care in cancer patients.

Management of infection and febrile neutropenia in patients with solid cancer.

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.

SEOM clinical guidelines in metastatic breast cancer 2015.

Metastatic breast cancer is essentially an incurable disease. However, recent advances have resulted in a significant improvement of overall survival. The SEOM guidelines are intended to make evidence-based recommendations on how to manage patients with metastatic breast cancer to achieve the best patient outcomes based on a rational use of the currently available therapies. To assign a level of certainty and a grade of recommendation the United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines methodology was selected as reference.

In vitro sequence-dependent synergistic effect of suramin and camptothecin.

Suramin, a hexasulphonated naphthylurea with activity in prostatic cancer, possesses a wide variety of antitumour mechanisms of action, one of which is the inhibition of topoisomerase II. In this in vitro study, suramin was combined with the topoisomerase I inhibitor, camptothecin. Several suramin concentrations (0.2-3000 microM) were combined with camptothecin (0.4 pM-20 microM) in MCF-7 and PC3 human cancer cell line cultures. In addition, we studied the topoisomerase II and I gene expression by northern blot analysis, and the cell cycle distribution by flow cytometry, after exposure to suramin. While there was only an additive effect when suramin and camptothecin were added simultaneously, a remarkable synergism was obtained when camptothecin was added after a 3-day exposure to suramin. Topoisomerase II and I gene expression and the number of cells in S phase were significantly reduced after exposure to suramin. In conclusion, interaction of suramin with camptothecin is schedule-dependent and can be synergistic. These findings might help in identifying optimal combinations of suramin or other topoisomerase II inhibitors, with topoisomerase I inhibitors.

Gemcitabine/vinorelbine in metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with anthracyclines: results of a phase II trial.

This phase II study was designed to evaluate the response rate (RR) and toxicity of gemcitabine/vinorelbine in patients with metastatic breast cancer. All patients had previously received anthracyclines. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1200 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Median age was 59 years (range, 33-73 years). Ten patients had received only adjuvant therapy with anthracyclines. The remaining 15 patients had received chemotherapy for metastatic disease, including taxanes in 11 cases. Four patients could not be evaluated for response. By intent-to-treat analysis, the overall RR was 44% (95% CI, 24.4%-65%). Median duration of response and median time to treatment failure were 21 and 17 weeks, respectively. The main toxicity was hematologic, with grade 3/4 neutropenia occurring in 13 patients and 1 patient developing febrile neutropenia. Two deaths from pneumonia occurred. These results reveal an encouraging activity with a reasonable toxicity profile in a patient population with an unfavorable prognosis. Our group is conducting a randomized study to compare this combination with vinorelbine alone in patients with metastatic breast cancer after failure to respond to anthracyclines and taxanes

UFT in combination as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Grupo Oncologico de Sevilla Seville, Spain.

Between 1989 and 1993, 409 evaluable patients with breast cancer have been treated with tegafur and uracil (UFT) in an adjuvant setting in two different trials. Data from both trials were reviewed in December 1995 after a mean follow-up of 5.09 +/- 1.1 years (range, 2.9 to 7.1 years). The aim of the first trial was to demonstrate the activity of UFT 400 mg/day for 6 months plus prednimustine 60 mg/m2 for 7 consecutive days, every 28 days in 6 cycles given orally (arm B). This scheme was compared with 6 cycles of cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2, plus methotrexate 40 mg/m2, plus fluorouracil 600 mg/m2, every 4 weeks (arm A). In this study, 187 premenopausal women were evaluable, 96 in arm A and 91 in arm B, all of whom had positive axillary nodes. Although there were more younger patients in arm A than in arm B, prognostic factors were similar in both groups. Disease-free survival and overall survival were similar in both arms. However, some concern is raised by the low disease-free survival rate. The toxicity was mild (mainly nausea and vomiting and alopecia) and slightly worse in arm A. We believe that oral administration could be a useful alternative to the parenteral route. In the second trial, 222 evaluable patients received 20 mg/day of tamoxifen (Nolvadex) for 1 year (arm A), or the same dose of tamoxifen plus UFT 400 mg/day for 6 months. All patients were postmenopausal, and the characteristics of the tumors were the same as those in patients in the first trial. In arm A there were 109 patients and in arm B, 113. The groups were well balanced. The overall survival and the disease-free survival rates were equal in both arms, but were longer in arm B in the subset of patients with five or more axillary-involved nodes. The toxicity was negligible in both arms. We conclude that UFT/tamoxifen might be useful in postmenopausal patients with five or more involved nodes who are unable to follow a more aggressive schedule because of their age or low performance status.

SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer.

Androgen deprivation treatment is the current standard first-line treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. For several years, docetaxel was the only treatment with a proven survival benefit for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Since docetaxel became standard of care for men with symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), three treatment virtual spaces, for treatment and drug development in CPRC, have emerged: pre-docetaxel, docetaxel combinations and post-docetaxel. Sipuleucel-T, cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and radium-223 have been approved in the pre- or post-docetaxel setting in metastatic CRPC during the last few years. Patients are now living longer and experiencing better quality of life. Strategies for patient selection and treatment sequencing are therefore urgently required.