Observational study of vaccination in cancer patients: How can vaccine coverage be improved?

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy increases the risk of infections, often severe, and some of them are vaccine-preventable infections. We aimed to assess vaccination coverage and associated factors in oncology and hematology patients. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients followed in a French university hospital for hematological malignancy or solid cancer voluntarily completed an anonymous questionnaire in September and October 2016. It included questions on underlying disease, chemotherapy, flu, and pneumococcal vaccination uptakes, and attitudes toward vaccination. Factors associated with vaccination uptake were assessed by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: The response rate was 41.9% (N=671) among 1,600 questionnaires distributed; 232 patients had underlying hematological malignancy and 439 had solid cancer. Half of the patients were aged over 65 years. Chemotherapy was ongoing or discontinued for less than one year in 74.7% of patients. In patients aged <65 years undergoing chemotherapy, flu vaccination rate was 19.9% whereas patients aged >65 years had coverage of 47%. Pneumococcal vaccine uptake was 7.3%. However, 64.7% of patients were favorable to vaccination. Vaccine uptake was associated with age >65 years (OR 4.5 [2.9-7.0]), information about vaccination delivered by the family physician (OR 12.9 [5.5-30.1]), follow-up in hematology unit (OR 2.0 [1.3-3.1]), and positive opinion about vaccination (OR 2.0 [1.3-3.1]). CONCLUSION: Despite specific recommendations regarding immunocompromised patients, anti-pneumococcal and flu vaccinations were rarely conducted, even in elderly patients. Targeted information campaigns to family physicians, oncologists, and patients should be implemented to improve vaccine coverage in patients with underlying malignancies.

[Longitudinal follow-up of the IPSS within the 5 years following treatment of a localized prostate cancer: overall analysis and by type of treatment]. / Suivi longitudinal de l'IPSS dans les cinq ans suivant un traitement d'un cancer de prostate localisé: analyse globale et par type de traitement.

OBJECTIVES: The International Prostate Score Symptom (IPSS) and the question of quality of life (QOL-Q) associated were used in this study for monitoring patients treated for localized prostate cancer (P-Ca). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three groups treated with radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (RT) or brachytherapy (BRACHY) completed the self-administered questionnaire IPSS and Q-QOL before treatment (bef-TT), after 3 months and once a year for 5 years. RESULTS: The study included 40 PR, 40 RT and 40 BRACHY. There was no difference between the three groups in bef-TT for the IPSS and Q-QOL or in the patients' characteristics, and P-Ca except for age and a higher PSA in the RT group (70.6 years old and 10.0 ng/mL vs. 66.5/66.2 and 7.1/6.2 for RP and CURIE respectively). The impact, no matter what treatment they received, was significant after the third month and then went back to the pre-AN1 at TT. The analysis by group treatment showed no significant difference between groups at 3months and during the first 4 years of follow-up. In the fifth year the RT group had a greater IPSS than BRACHY and PR groups (P<0.04). CONCLUSION: This study showed no degradation of the IPSS or Q-QOL remote treatment of localized prostate cancer. Urinary incontinence has been partially exploring. His study would have allowed a better urinary quality of life analysis in these patients.

[Corticotherapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer]. / Corticothérapie dans le cancer de la prostate résistant à la castration.

INTRODUCTION: Corticosteroids are commonly used in the treatment of prostate cancer resistant to castration (PCRC), partly due to the inhibitory effects on adrenal androgen production acting as a pituitary suppressant. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE database using the following key words: prostate cancer; castration resistance; metastasis; corticotherapy. RESULTS: Corticosteroids exert direct anti-tumoral activities mediated by the glucocorticoids receptor and involving cellular/tissue functions as growth, apoptosis, inflammation, metastasis, differentiation and angiogenesis. As a pain relieving agents, corticosteroids significantly relieve PCRC clinical symptoms, especially those due to bone metastasis. In the comparative arm of phase II-III trials, corticosteroids administered daily produce a PSA decline. Among the adverse effects due to corticosteroids, bone loss and cardiovascular risk should be carefully monitored. In association with abiraterone acetate, corticosteroids increase overall survival in PCRC patients, and reduce the mineralocorticoid side effects of abiraterone. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids in monotherapy for PCRC have a limited efficacy. In association with abiraterone acetate it reduces the mineralocorticoid toxicity and enhances the androgenic suppression.