Actual body weight dosing of temozolomide and overall survival in patients with glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND: Adult glioblastoma patients receiving standard radiation therapy and concurrent temozolomide chemotherapy have a median survival of 14.6 months. Based on the pivotal trial data by Stupp et al., temozolomide doses were calculated based on body surface area. However, no details regarding the weight used to calculate body surface area was included in the study. As a result, temozolomide doses have been variable across the province. METHODS: This retrospective chart review was conducted to determine the correlation between dose of first line temozolomide with overall survival. Patients between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2014 who were newly diagnosed, pathology confirmed glioblastoma treated first line with temozolomide within Alberta Health Services were included in the study. Temozolomide doses above and below determined cut points were compared through the Kaplan-Meier method, then assessed using the log-rank test. RESULTS: A cut point of 97.8% of actual body weight calculated body surface area dosing was determined for concurrent phase temozolomide. At doses above this cut point, there was a statistically significant (p = 0.0158) increase of 0.3 years in median overall survival. As for toxicity concerns, there was a statistically significant increase in the proportion of temozolomide dose reductions due to toxicity in patients dosed above the cut point. CONCLUSION: Temozolomide doses at full actual body weight calculated body surface area dosing during the concurrent phase is required to achieve a similar median OS as seen in the pivotal trial by Stupp et al.

Implementing routine screening for distress, the sixth vital sign, for patients with head and neck and neurologic cancers.

This study examined the benefits of incorporating screening for distress as a routine part of care for patients with head and neck and neurologic cancers in a tertiary cancer center. Using a comparative 2-cohort pre-post implementation sequential design, consecutive outpatients with head and neck and neurologic cancers were recruited into 2 separate cohorts. Cohort 1 included patients attending clinics during April 2010, before the implementation of the screening program. The program was then implemented and patients completed the Screening for Distress Minimum Dataset (the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS] and the Canadian Problem Checklist [CPC]) at each clinic visit. Cohort 2 included patients attending clinics during March 2011. Consenting patients completed screening and outcome measures (ESAS, CPC, and either the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain or the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck). A total of 146 patients (78 head and neck and 68 neurologic) provided data for Cohort 1, and 143 (81 head and neck and 62 neurologic) provided data for Cohort 2. Compared with Cohort 1, patients with neurologic cancers in Cohort 2 reported significantly higher scores on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General total and emotional quality of life subscale; fewer high scores (≥ 4) on the ESAS breathlessness item; and fewer problems with fears/worries, frustration/anger, finding meaning in life, and worry about friends/family. Head and neck patients in Cohort 2 reported significantly higher emotional quality of life and fewer problems with eating and weight than those in Cohort 1. Although no definitive causal attributions can be made, patients exposed to routine screening for distress reported better well-being and fewer emotional, physical, and practical problems than historical controls.