RESUMEN
Despite recent calls to intensify the search for new risk factors for breast cancer, acting on information that we already have could prevent thousands of cases each year. This article reviews breast cancer primary prevention strategies that are applicable to all women, discusses the underutilization of chemoprevention in high-risk women, highlights the additional advances that could be made by including young women in prevention efforts, and comments on how the molecular heterogeneity of breast cancer affects prevention research and strategies.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Prevención Primaria , Bebidas Alcohólicas , Peso Corporal , Neoplasias de la Mama/etiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/psicología , Quimioprevención , Ejercicio Físico , Femenino , HumanosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreduction among women with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: The Society of Gynecologic Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature. RESULTS: Four phase III clinical trials form the primary evidence base for the recommendations. The published studies suggest that for selected women with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreduction are non-inferior to primary cytoreduction and adjuvant chemotherapy with respect to overall and progression-free survival and are associated with less perioperative morbidity and mortality. RECOMMENDATIONS: All women with suspected stage IIIC or IV invasive epithelial ovarian cancer should be evaluated by a gynecologic oncologist prior to initiation of therapy. The primary clinical evaluation should include a CT of the abdomen and pelvis, and chest imaging (CT preferred). Women with a high perioperative risk profile or a low likelihood of achieving cytoreduction to <1cm of residual disease (ideally to no visible disease) should receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Women who are fit for primary cytoreductive surgery, and with potentially resectable disease, may receive either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary cytoreductive surgery. However, primary cytoreductive surgery is preferred if there is a high likelihood of achieving cytoreduction to <1cm (ideally to no visible disease) with acceptable morbidity. Before neoadjuvant chemotherapy is delivered, all patients should have confirmation of an invasive ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/NACT-ovarian-guideline and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.
Asunto(s)
Terapia Neoadyuvante , Neoplasias Glandulares y Epiteliales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Ováricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Carcinoma Epitelial de Ovario , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Femenino , Humanos , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Neoplasias Glandulares y Epiteliales/patología , Neoplasias Ováricas/patologíaRESUMEN
Nearly one in four breast cancers is diagnosed before the age of 50, and many early-stage premalignant lesions are present but not yet diagnosed. Therefore, we review evidence to support the strategy that breast cancer prevention efforts must begin early in life. This study follows the literature review methods and format. Exposures during childhood and adolescence affect a woman's long-term risk of breast cancer, but have received far less research attention than exposures that occur later in life. Breast tissue undergoes rapid cellular proliferation between menarche and first full-term pregnancy, and risk accumulates rapidly until the terminal differentiation that accompanies first pregnancy. Evidence on childhood diet and growth in height, and adolescent alcohol intake, among other adolescent factors is related to breast cancer risk and risk of premalignant proliferative benign lesions. Breast cancer prevention efforts will have the greatest effect when initiated at an early age and continued over a lifetime. Gaps in knowledge are identified and deserve increase attention to inform prevention.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Mama/patología , Adolescente , Adulto , Consumo de Bebidas Alcohólicas/efectos adversos , Mama/citología , Niño , Dieta , Ejercicio Físico , Conducta Alimentaria , Femenino , Humanos , Estilo de Vida , Embarazo , Riesgo , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Adherence to colorectal cancer screening recommendations is known to vary by state, but less information is available about within-state variability. In the current study, we assess county-level screening rates for Missouri, with the goal of better targeting public health efforts to increase screening. METHODS: Prevalence of colorectal cancer screening among Missouri adults between the ages of 50 and 74 was obtained from 2008 and 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data. We used multilevel logistic regression to generate county-specific estimates. After excluding 77 counties with fewer than 30 respondents, information was available about 3,739 individuals in 37 counties, representing 78.5 % of the state population. RESULTS: Across counties, the prevalence of being up-to-date with recommended colorectal cancer screening ranged from 25 to 70 %. CONCLUSION: State-level information about colorectal cancer screening masks substantial within-state variability. Assessing and monitoring county-level disparities in screening can guide public health efforts to increase screening and reduce colorectal cancer mortality. More complete population survey data will make such analysis possible.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/prevención & control , Adulto , Anciano , Sistema de Vigilancia de Factor de Riesgo Conductual , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Femenino , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Missouri/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Servicios Preventivos de Salud/métodos , Salud Pública/métodosRESUMEN
@JCO_ASCO guideline on #cannabis in cancer with @JCOOP_ASCO companion Q&A addressing key clinical questions.
Asunto(s)
Cannabinoides , Neoplasias , Humanos , Cannabinoides/uso terapéutico , Cannabinoides/farmacología , Cannabinoides/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Adulto , Marihuana Medicinal/uso terapéutico , CannabisRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To guide clinicians, adults with cancer, caregivers, researchers, and oncology institutions on the medical use of cannabis and cannabinoids, including synthetic cannabinoids and herbal cannabis derivatives; single, purified cannabinoids; combinations of cannabis ingredients; and full-spectrum cannabis. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cohort studies on the efficacy and safety of cannabis and cannabinoids when used by adults with cancer. Outcomes of interest included antineoplastic effects, cancer treatment toxicity, symptoms, and quality of life. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to January 27, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The evidence base consisted of 13 systematic reviews and five additional primary studies (four RCTs and one cohort study). The certainty of evidence for most outcomes was low or very low. RECOMMENDATIONS: Cannabis and/or cannabinoid access and use by adults with cancer has outpaced the science supporting their clinical use. This guideline provides strategies for open, nonjudgmental communication between clinicians and adults with cancer about the use of cannabis and/or cannabinoids. Clinicians should recommend against using cannabis or cannabinoids as a cancer-directed treatment unless within the context of a clinical trial. Cannabis and/or cannabinoids may improve refractory, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting when added to guideline-concordant antiemetic regimens. Whether cannabis and/or cannabinoids can improve other supportive care outcomes remains uncertain. This guideline also highlights the critical need for more cannabis and/or cannabinoid research.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Cannabinoides , Marihuana Medicinal , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Cannabinoides/uso terapéutico , Cannabinoides/efectos adversos , Marihuana Medicinal/uso terapéutico , Marihuana Medicinal/efectos adversos , AdultoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To guide the vaccination of adults with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and nonrandomized studies on the efficacy and safety of vaccines used by adults with cancer or their household contacts. This review builds on a 2013 guideline by the Infectious Disease Society of America. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2013, to February 16, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 102 publications were included in the systematic review: 24 systematic reviews, 14 RCTs, and 64 nonrandomized studies. The largest body of evidence addressed COVID-19 vaccines. RECOMMENDATIONS: The goal of vaccination is to limit the severity of infection and prevent infection where feasible. Optimizing vaccination status should be considered a key element in the care of patients with cancer. This approach includes the documentation of vaccination status at the time of the first patient visit; timely provision of recommended vaccines; and appropriate revaccination after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, or B-cell-depleting therapy. Active interaction and coordination among healthcare providers, including primary care practitioners, pharmacists, and nursing team members, are needed. Vaccination of household contacts will enhance protection for patients with cancer. Some vaccination and revaccination plans for patients with cancer may be affected by the underlying immune status and the anticancer therapy received. As a result, vaccine strategies may differ from the vaccine recommendations for the general healthy adult population vaccine.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Vacunación , Humanos , Neoplasias/terapia , Vacunación/normas , Adulto , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2/inmunologíaRESUMEN
ASCO Rapid Recommendations Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual. The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options. See the Appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2, online only).
Asunto(s)
Caquexia , Neoplasias , Humanos , Caquexia/diagnóstico , Caquexia/etiología , Caquexia/terapia , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/terapiaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide guidance on the use of opioids to manage pain from cancer or cancer treatment in adults. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature identified systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics in people with cancer, approaches to opioid initiation and titration, and the prevention and management of opioid adverse events. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2010, to February 17, 2022. American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The evidence base consisted of 31 systematic reviews and 16 randomized controlled trials. Opioids have primarily been evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain, and they effectively reduce pain in this population, with well-characterized adverse effects. Evidence was limited for several of the questions of interest, and the Expert Panel relied on consensus for these recommendations or noted that no recommendation could be made at this time. RECOMMENDATIONS: Opioids should be offered to patients with moderate-to-severe pain related to cancer or active cancer treatment unless contraindicated. Opioids should be initiated PRN (as needed) at the lowest possible dose to achieve acceptable analgesia and patient goals, with early assessment and frequent titration. For patients with a substance use disorder, clinicians should collaborate with a palliative care, pain, and/or substance use disorder specialist to determine the optimal approach to pain management. Opioid adverse effects should be monitored, and strategies are provided for prevention and management.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Dolor en Cáncer , Neoplasias , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Humanos , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor/etiología , Manejo del Dolor , Dolor en Cáncer/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To conduct an update of the ASCO venous thromboembolism (VTE) guideline. METHODS: After publication of potentially practice-changing clinical trials, identified through ASCO's signals approach to updating, an updated systematic review was performed for two guideline questions: perioperative thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between November 1, 2018, and June 6, 2022. RESULTS: Five RCTs provided information that contributed to changes to the 2019 recommendations. Two RCTs addressed direct factor Xa inhibitors (either rivaroxaban or apixaban) for extended thromboprophylaxis after surgery. Each of these postoperative trials had important limitations but suggested that these two oral anticoagulants are safe and effective in the settings studied. An additional three RCTs addressed apixaban in the setting of VTE treatment. Apixaban was effective in reducing the risk of recurrent VTE, with a low risk of major bleeding. RECOMMENDATIONS: Apixaban and rivaroxaban were added as options for extended pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after cancer surgery, with a weak strength of recommendation. Apixaban was also added as an option for the treatment of VTE, with high quality of evidence and a strong recommendation.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & control , Rivaroxabán/efectos adversos , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/cirugíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide guidance on exercise, diet, and weight management during active cancer treatment in adults. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature identified systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of aerobic and resistance exercise, specific diets and foods, and intentional weight loss and avoidance of weight gain in adults during cancer treatment, on quality of life, treatment toxicity, and cancer control. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 to May 2021. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The evidence base consisted of 52 systematic reviews (42 for exercise, nine for diet, and one for weight management), and an additional 23 randomized controlled trials. The most commonly studied types of cancer were breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal. Exercise during cancer treatment led to improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, strength, fatigue, and other patient-reported outcomes. Preoperative exercise in patients with lung cancer led to a reduction in postoperative length of hospital stay and complications. Neutropenic diets did not decrease risk of infection during cancer treatment. RECOMMENDATIONS: Oncology providers should recommend regular aerobic and resistance exercise during active treatment with curative intent and may recommend preoperative exercise for patients undergoing surgery for lung cancer. Neutropenic diets are not recommended to prevent infection in patients with cancer during active treatment. Evidence for other dietary and weight loss interventions during cancer treatment was very limited. The guideline discusses special considerations, such as exercise in individuals with advanced cancer, and highlights the critical need for more research in this area, particularly regarding diet and weight loss interventions during cancer treatment.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Calidad de Vida , Adulto , Dieta , Ejercicio Físico , Humanos , Masculino , Pérdida de PesoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for prevention and management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by nonsurgical cancer therapies. METHODS: Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published between January 2009 and June 2020. The guideline also incorporated two previous systematic reviews conducted by MASCC/ISOO, which included studies published from 1990 through 2008. RESULTS: A total of 58 publications were identified: 46 addressed preventive interventions and 12 addressed therapeutic interventions. A majority of the evidence focused on the setting of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. For the prevention of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer, there is high-quality evidence for tissue-sparing radiation modalities. Evidence is weaker or insufficient for other interventions. For the management of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, intermediate-quality evidence supports the use of topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and agents that stimulate the salivary reflex. RECOMMENDATIONS: For patients who receive radiation therapy for head and neck cancer, tissue-sparing radiation modalities should be used when possible to reduce the risk of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia. Other risk-reducing interventions that may be offered during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer include bethanechol and acupuncture. For patients who develop salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, interventions include topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and sugar-free lozenges or chewing gum. For patients with head and neck cancer, oral pilocarpine and oral cevimeline, acupuncture, or transcutaneous electrostimulation may be offered after radiation therapy.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Quimioradioterapia/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Enfermedades de las Glándulas Salivales/patología , Trasplante de Células Madre/efectos adversos , Xerostomía/patología , Humanos , Neoplasias/patología , Pronóstico , Enfermedades de las Glándulas Salivales/etiología , Enfermedades de las Glándulas Salivales/terapia , Sociedades Médicas , Xerostomía/etiología , Xerostomía/terapiaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide guidance on the clinical management of dyspnea in adult patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. An Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) systematic review provided the evidence base for nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions to alleviate dyspnea. The review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with a concurrent comparison group published through early May 2020. The ASCO Expert Panel also wished to address dyspnea assessment, management of underlying conditions, and palliative care referrals, and for these questions, an additional systematic review identified RCTs, systematic reviews, and guidelines published through July 2020. RESULTS: The AHRQ systematic review included 48 RCTs and two retrospective cohort studies. Lung cancer and mesothelioma were the most commonly addressed types of cancer. Nonpharmacologic interventions such as fans provided some relief from breathlessness. Support for pharmacologic interventions was limited. A meta-analysis of specialty breathlessness services reported improvements in distress because of dyspnea. RECOMMENDATIONS: A hierarchical approach to dyspnea management is recommended, beginning with dyspnea assessment, ascertainment and management of potentially reversible causes, and referral to an interdisciplinary palliative care team. Nonpharmacologic interventions that may be offered to relieve dyspnea include airflow interventions (eg, a fan directed at the cheek), standard supplemental oxygen for patients with hypoxemia, and other psychoeducational, self-management, or complementary approaches. For patients who derive inadequate relief from nonpharmacologic interventions, systemic opioids should be offered. Other pharmacologic interventions, such as corticosteroids and benzodiazepines, are also discussed.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Disnea/terapia , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Disnea/etiología , HumanosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide recommendations for appropriate dosing of systemic antineoplastic agents in obese adults with cancer. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature collected evidence regarding dosing of chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapies in obese adults with cancer. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, or cohort studies published from November 1, 2010, through March 27, 2020. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: Sixty studies, primarily retrospective, were included in the review. Overall, the evidence supported previous findings that obese adult patients tolerate full, body-size-based dosing of chemotherapy as well as nonobese patients. Fewer studies have addressed the dosing of targeted therapies and immunotherapies in relation to safety and efficacy in obese patients. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Panel continues to recommend that full, weight-based cytotoxic chemotherapy doses be used to treat obese adults with cancer. New to this version of the guideline, the Panel also recommends that full, approved doses of immunotherapy and targeted therapies be offered to obese adults with cancer. In the event of toxicity, the consensus of the Panel is that dose modifications of systemic antineoplastic therapies should be handled similarly for obese and nonobese patients. Important areas for future research include the impact of sarcopenia and other measures of body composition on optimal antineoplastic dosing, and more customized dosing based on pharmacokinetic or pharmacogenetic factors.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Obesidad/complicaciones , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Humanos , Revisiones Sistemáticas como AsuntoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based guidance on the clinical management of cancer cachexia in adult patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature collected evidence regarding nutritional, pharmacologic, and other interventions, such as exercise, for cancer cachexia. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs published from 1966 through October 17, 2019. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The review included 20 systematic reviews and 13 additional RCTs. Dietary counseling, with or without oral nutritional supplements, was reported to increase body weight in some trials, but evidence remains limited. Pharmacologic interventions associated with improvements in appetite and/or body weight include progesterone analogs and corticosteroids. The other evaluated interventions either had no benefit or insufficient evidence of benefit to draw conclusions on efficacy. Limitations of the evidence include high drop-out rates, consistent with advanced cancer, as well as variability across studies in outcomes of interest and methods for outcome assessment. RECOMMENDATIONS: Dietary counseling may be offered with the goals of providing patients and caregivers with advice for the management of cachexia. Enteral feeding tubes and parenteral nutrition should not be used routinely. In the absence of more robust evidence, no specific pharmacological intervention can be recommended as the standard of care; therefore, clinicians may choose not to prescribe medications specifically for the treatment of cancer cachexia. Nonetheless, when it is decided to trial a drug to improve appetite and/or improve weight gain, currently available pharmacologic interventions that may be used include progesterone analogs and short-term (weeks) corticosteroids.
Asunto(s)
Caquexia/terapia , Neoplasias/complicaciones , HumanosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To update the guideline to include new anticancer agents, antiemetics, and antiemetic regimens and to provide recommendations on the use of dexamethasone as a prophylactic antiemetic in patients receiving checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs). METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel and updated the systematic review to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs published between June 1, 2016, and January 24, 2020. To address the dexamethasone and CPI question, we conducted a systematic review of RCTs that evaluated the addition of a CPI to chemotherapy. RESULTS: The systematic reviews included 3 publications from the updated search and 10 publications on CPIs. Two phase III trials in adult patients with non-small-cell lung cancers evaluating a platinum-based doublet with or without the programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor pembrolizumab recommended that all patients receive dexamethasone as a component of the prophylactic antiemetic regimen. In both studies, superior outcomes were noted in the PD-1 inhibitor-containing arms. Other important findings address olanzapine in adults and fosaprepitant in pediatric patients. RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations for adults are unchanged with the exception of the option of adding olanzapine in the setting of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Dosing information now includes the option of a 5-mg dose of olanzapine in adults and intravenous formulations of aprepitant and netupitant-palonosetron. The option of fosaprepitant is added to pediatric recommendations. There is no clinical evidence to warrant omission of dexamethasone from guideline-compliant prophylactic antiemetic regimens when CPIs are administered to adults in combination with chemotherapy. CPIs administered alone or in combination with another CPI do not require the routine use of a prophylactic antiemetic.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Antieméticos/uso terapéutico , Antieméticos/farmacología , HumanosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide updated recommendations about prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer. METHODS: PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs published from August 1, 2014, through December 4, 2018. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and revise previous recommendations as needed. RESULTS: The systematic review included 35 publications on VTE prophylaxis and treatment and 18 publications on VTE risk assessment. Two RCTs of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of VTE in patients with cancer reported that edoxaban and rivaroxaban are effective but are linked with a higher risk of bleeding compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with GI and potentially genitourinary cancers. Two additional RCTs reported on DOACs for thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer at increased risk of VTE. RECOMMENDATIONS: Changes to previous recommendations: Clinicians may offer thromboprophylaxis with apixaban, rivaroxaban, or LMWH to selected high-risk outpatients with cancer; rivaroxaban and edoxaban have been added as options for VTE treatment; patients with brain metastases are now addressed in the VTE treatment section; and the recommendation regarding long-term postoperative LMWH has been expanded. Re-affirmed recommendations: Most hospitalized patients with cancer and an acute medical condition require thromboprophylaxis throughout hospitalization. Thromboprophylaxis is not routinely recommended for all outpatients with cancer. Patients undergoing major cancer surgery should receive prophylaxis starting before surgery and continuing for at least 7 to 10 days. Patients with cancer should be periodically assessed for VTE risk, and oncology professionals should provide patient education about the signs and symptoms of VTE.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias/complicaciones , Tromboembolia Venosa/terapia , Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Neoplasias/patología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/patología , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & controlRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/American Society of Hematology (ASH) recommendations for use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in patients with cancer. METHODS: PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs in patients with cancer published from January 31, 2010, through May 14, 2018. For biosimilar ESAs, the literature search was expanded to include meta-analyses and RCTs in patients with cancer or chronic kidney disease and cohort studies in patients with cancer due to limited RCT evidence in the cancer setting. ASCO and ASH convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and revise previous recommendations as needed. RESULTS: The primary literature review included 15 meta-analyses of RCTs and two RCTs. A growing body of evidence suggests that adding iron to treatment with an ESA may improve hematopoietic response and reduce the likelihood of RBC transfusion. The biosimilar literature review suggested that biosimilars of epoetin alfa have similar efficacy and safety to reference products, although evidence in cancer remains limited. RECOMMENDATIONS: ESAs (including biosimilars) may be offered to patients with chemotherapy-associated anemia whose cancer treatment is not curative in intent and whose hemoglobin has declined to < 10 g/dL. RBC transfusion is also an option. With the exception of selected patients with myelodysplastic syndromes, ESAs should not be offered to most patients with nonchemotherapy-associated anemia. During ESA treatment, hemoglobin may be increased to the lowest concentration needed to avoid transfusions. Iron replacement may be used to improve hemoglobin response and reduce RBC transfusions for patients receiving ESA with or without iron deficiency. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines and www.hematology.org/guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Anemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Biosimilares Farmacéuticos/uso terapéutico , Hematínicos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Anemia/etiología , Anemia/metabolismo , Anemia/patología , Hematología , Humanos , Neoplasias/metabolismo , Neoplasias/patología , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Sociedades Médicas , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/American Society of Hematology (ASH) recommendations for use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in patients with cancer. METHODS: PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs in patients with cancer published from January 31, 2010, through May 14, 2018. For biosimilar ESAs, the literature search was expanded to include meta-analyses and RCTs in patients with cancer or chronic kidney disease and cohort studies in patients with cancer due to limited RCT evidence in the cancer setting. ASCO and ASH convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and revise previous recommendations as needed. RESULTS: The primary literature review included 15 meta-analyses of RCTs and two RCTs. A growing body of evidence suggests that adding iron to treatment with an ESA may improve hematopoietic response and reduce the likelihood of RBC transfusion. The biosimilar literature review suggested that biosimilars of epoetin alfa have similar efficacy and safety to reference products, although evidence in cancer remains limited. RECOMMENDATIONS: ESAs (including biosimilars) may be offered to patients with chemotherapy-associated anemia whose cancer treatment is not curative in intent and whose hemoglobin has declined to < 10 g/dL. RBC transfusion is also an option. With the exception of selected patients with myelodysplastic syndromes, ESAs should not be offered to most patients with nonchemotherapy-associated anemia. During ESA treatment, hemoglobin may be increased to the lowest concentration needed to avoid transfusions. Iron replacement may be used to improve hemoglobin response and reduce RBC transfusions for patients receiving ESA with or without iron deficiency. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines and www.hematology.org/guidelines .