Pembrolizumab-induced secondary adrenal insufficiency due to adrenocorticotrophic hormone deficiency in a patient with non-small-cell lung carcinoma: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab can cause immune-related adverse events such as adrenal insufficiency (AI). However, there is no consensus regarding appropriate monitoring of adrenal function during subsequent chemotherapy in patients who have received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) such as pembrolizumab. CASE PRESENTATION: In this report, we discuss the case of a 60s-year-old male patient with non-small cell lung cancer receiving chemotherapy who developed secondary AI due to adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) deficiency 8 months after the discontinuation of pembrolizumab, which was 17 months after the initiation of pembrolizumab immunotherapy. After 5 months of chemotherapy, he developed fever and diarrhoea, after which chemotherapy was discontinued. Thereafter, he was hospitalised owing to the development of general fatigue and anorexia. Although cortisol and ACTH levels were not measured during chemotherapy, they were measured before hospitalisation, and secondary AI was suspected. After admission, a detailed endocrine workup was performed, and the patient was diagnosed with secondary AI due to ACTH deficiency. Treatment with hydrocortisone was initiated, which markedly improved his general fatigue and anorexia. The patient showed no evidence of progressive disease 9 months after the discontinuation of pembrolizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Although rare, the possibility of AI should be considered in patients who have received ICIs when nonspecific symptoms develop during or after subsequent chemotherapy, and measurements of endocrine function (including cortisol and ACTH levels) should be performed.

Successful continuance of CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment with palbociclib after abemaciclib-induced hepatotoxicity in breast cancer: a case report.

Abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, causes severe hepatotoxicity, a severe adverse event associated with the loss of treatment opportunities. We report a case of liver injury (grade 4) during treatment with abemaciclib, in which the patient was switched to palbociclib and successfully treated with this CDK4/6 inhibitor. A 73-year-old woman with bone metastatic breast cancer (hormone-positive, HER2-negative) was treated with abemaciclib, fulvestrant, denosumab, and precipitated calcium carbonate with cholecalciferol and magnesium carbonate (pCCCM). On day 17, the patient developed skin rashes on her trunk and arms. On day 22, abemaciclib and pCCCM were discontinued due to drug eruption. Grade 3 aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and grade 4 alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels increased on day 29. Therefore, fulvestrant and denosumab were suspended as the causes of severe hepatotoxicity, in addition to the two drugs suspected of causing the skin eruption. On day 43, AST and ALT levels did not improve, and the patient was referred to a hepatologist. The hepatologist diagnosed hepatotoxicity as a drug-induced liver injury through additional tests and interviews. Fulvestrant treatment was resumed on day 78, and palbociclib on day 92, and denosumab and pCCCM on day 134. On day 287, treatment with the CDK4/6 inhibitor was continued without evidence of liver dysfunction. This case suggests that rechallenge with palbociclib after severe liver injury with abemaciclib may allow for continued treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors.

Psychological barriers to the use of opioid analgesics for treating pain in patients with advanced recurrent cancer (BAROC): protocol for a multicentre cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid analgesics are essential for treating cancer pain. However, patients are sometimes reluctant to use them because of concerns about addiction and dependence. Rapid pain relief following opioid administration may help overcome the psychological barriers to opioid analgesic use. This study aims to determine the relationship between psychological resistance to strong opioid analgesic use and pain amelioration speed in patients with advanced recurrent cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This ongoing, multicentre, observational study enrols patients aged 20 years or older with distant metastasis or advanced recurrent cancer receiving strong opioid analgesics for cancer pain for the first time. All participants, both inpatient and outpatient, were recruited from five Japanese hospitals. We are investigating the relationship between psychological barriers at the start of treatment and pain relief during the first week of treatment in these patients. The primary outcome is the Japanese version of the Barriers Questionnaire-II score at baseline. The secondary outcomes are the relationships between psychological barriers to strong opioid analgesic use and changes in pain over time. The participants are asked to fill out an electronic patient-reported outcome daily during the first week of treatment. The sample size was determined based on the number of patients in the year prior to study commencement who used strong opioid analgesics, met the eligibility criteria and could be expected to consent to participate in the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee (approval ID B200600091) of Yokohama City University on 24 August 2020. The protocol has been reviewed by the institutional review boards at the four participating study sites. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at a relevant meeting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000042443.

Risk Associated with Severe Hematological Toxicity in Patients with Urothelial Cancer Receiving Combination Chemotherapy of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin.

INTRODUCTION: Combination chemotherapy of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) is the standard treatment for patients with urothelial cancer (UC). However, hematological toxicity is a major side effect of GC therapy in patients with UC. In particular, discontinuation of the GC therapy is associated to adverse events such as hematological toxicity. Some studies have reported general risk factors of hematological toxicity such as age. However, little is known about risk factors for GC therapy-associated hematological toxicity in patients with UC. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify risk factors for hematological toxicity in patients with UC receiving GC therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective evaluation of the data of 128 patients with UC who received GC therapy. The study end point was defined as the occurrence of grade 4 neutropenia and grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine risk factors that were significantly associated with neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. RESULTS: In total, 62 (48.4%) patients experienced grade 4 neutropenia, and 27 (21.1%) patients experienced grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia. In the multivariate analysis, performance status (PS) ≥1 (odds ratio [OR] 3.764, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.410-10.047, p = 0.008) and neutrophil count (OR 0.648, 95% CI 0.468-0.898, p = 0.009) were significantly associated with grade 4 neutropenia. Platelet count (PLT) (OR 0.896, 95% CI 0.832-0.966, p = 0.004) and potassium (K) level (OR 6.966, 95% CI 1.313-36.989, p = 0.023) were also significantly associated with grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: PS ≥ 1, neutrophil count, PLT, and K level were important risk factors for GC therapy-induced hematological toxicity in patients with UC. To continue GC therapy, further management systems by hematological toxicity risk factors for patients with UC will be required.