Psychosocial Impact of Virtual Cancer Care through Technology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

This meta-analysis of RCTs aimed to determine whether replacing face-to-face hospital care with telemedicine deteriorates psychosocial outcomes of adult cancer patients, in terms of quality of life (QoL), anxiety, distress, and depression. RCTs on interventions aimed at improving patient psychosocial outcomes were excluded. MEDLINE, EmBASE, and PsycInfo were searched on 13 May 2022 without language or date restrictions. In total, 1400 records were identified and 8 RCTs included (4434 subjects). Study methodological quality was moderate. Statistically significant improvements were observed in favor of the intervention for QoL (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.43, p = 0.04), anxiety (SMD = -0.17, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.04, p < 0.01), and global distress (SMD = -0.38, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.25, p < 0.01). A meta-analysis on depression could not be performed. In subgroup analyses, the intervention appeared to be more beneficial for patients receiving active treatment vs. follow-up, for "other cancer types" vs. breast cancer, and for "other modes of administration" vs. telephone. Given the many potential advantages of being assisted at home, telemedicine appears to be a viable option in oncology. However, more research is necessary to determine the types of patients who may benefit the most from these alternative care modalities.

Psychosocial Care for Adult Cancer Patients: Guidelines of the Italian Medical Oncology Association.

Psychosocial morbidity can have negative consequences for cancer patients, including maladaptive coping, poor treatment adherence, and lower quality of life. Evidence shows that psychosocial interventions can positively impact quality of life, as well as symptoms and side effects; however, they are not always offered to patients who might benefit from them. These guidelines were produced by a multidisciplinary panel of 16 experts, including patients, following GRADE methodology. The panel framed clinical questions and voted on outcomes to investigate. Studies identified by rigorous search strategies were assessed to rate certainty of evidence, and recommendations were formulated by the panel. Although the quality of the evidence found was generally moderate, interventions could be recommended aimed at improving patient information, communication with healthcare professionals and involvement in decision-making; detecting and managing patient psychosocial needs, particularly with non-pharmacological therapy; and supporting families of patients with advanced cancer. The role of nurses as providers of information and psychosocial care is stressed. Most recommended interventions do not appear to necessitate new services or infrastructures, and therefore do not require allocation of additional resources, but predominantly involve changes in clinical staff behavior and/or ward organization. Patients should be made aware of psychosocial care standards so that they can expect to receive them.

Feasibility of a quality improvement strategy integrating psychosocial care into 28 medical cancer centers (HuCare project).

PURPOSE: This study examines the development and feasibility of a quality improvement strategy for the translation of evidence-based psychosocial care into clinical practice. METHODS: The project involved all staff (oncologists, psychologists, and nurses) of the participating centers. Recommendations concerned: improvement of clinician communication skills; use of a patient question prompt list; assignment of a specialist nurse to each patient; screening for psychological distress and social needs; opportunity to attend a Point of Information and Support. The implementation strategy hinged on context analysis and problem solving. Four to six visits were held in each center by the project team to assist staff in identifying obstacles, finding solutions, and strengthening motivation. The primary variable was the adherence percentage to the recommendations (proportion of subjects receiving each intervention). The number of centers that failed to reach the objective was also reported (adherence percentage <75%). RESULTS: Twenty-seven of twenty-eight centers completed the study. Lack of resources was the most commonly perceived barrier preimplementation. Five-hundred-forty-five clinicians were actively involved in the project and completed training. The adherence percentage for each recommendation was greater than 85% except for the question prompt list (78%; 95% CI, 73-83%), where seven centers did not reach the objective. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that evidence-based interventions to improve the psychosocial care of people with cancer can be implemented in a diverse range of oncology wards. This requires the involvement and motivation of the entire staff of the ward, support by an expert team, and promotion by policymakers.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors used in clinical practice: PoloNord Registry-Based Cohort Italian Study.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors are widely used to reduce myelotoxicity of chemotherapy and to allow its regular administration. National and international guidelines regulate their use. The aim of the study was to evaluate the use of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim/lenograstim in clinical practice, adherence to ASCO and ESMO guidelines, chemotherapy-related complications and adverse reactions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 645 consecutive patients and 3,150 chemotherapy administrations, receiving granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, as primary/secondary prophylaxis or therapeutic use, for the first time during a line of chemotherapy, were recorded from 08/2008 to 08/2011, in 10 Lombardy Italian cancer centers. Patients and chemotherapy administrations data were examined in a multiple logistic regression analysis model. RESULTS: Adherence to guidelines: primary prophylaxis, pegfilgrastim and filgrastim/ lenograstim 66%/47% (P = 0.002); secondary prophylaxis, 19.0%/26.8%; but 56.8%/ 53.6% including patients at high risk of febrile neutropenia with grade 3-4 neutropenia. Correct timing start (administration 24-72 h after chemotherapy): pegfilgrastim and filgrastim/lenograstim, 93.2%/61.5% (P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the more correct administration of pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis and timing start, compared to filgrastim/lenograstim. In secondary prophylaxis, the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors is extended beyond guideline recommendations to support patients at high risk of febrile neutropenia and to guarantee dose intensity. These outcomes suggest both the need of educational activities and the development of predictive tools to better define high risk patients and the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors.

Phase I-II trial of gemcitabine-based first-line chemotherapies for small cell lung cancer in elderly patients with performance status 0-2: the G-STEP trial.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of elderly patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is based on scanty evidence. METHODS: Patients with extensive SCLC, age >70 years, and performance status 0-2 were eligible for a study looking for optimal two-drug combination of gemcitabine (Gem) with vinorelbine (Vin), etoposide (Eto), cisplatin (Cis), or carboplatin (Car). Gemcitabine dose was the same (1000 mg/m2, days 1-8) in all combinations. A two-stage minimax flexible design for response was applied to GemVin combination (Vin 25 mg/m2, days 1-8). For GemCar, GemCis, GemEto, a phase I-II Bayesian design was applied, looking for the optimal dose of the partner drugs. Objective response rate ≥ 60% and unacceptable toxicity ≤ 25% were required to define a combination worthy of further studies. RESULTS: Median age of 78 eligible patients was 74 years. GemVin produced a 36.7% objective response rate. GemEto and GemCis arms were found not sufficiently active. GemCar produced 16 responses (14 with area under the curve [AUC] 3.5 and 2 with AUC 4.0) in 26 patients (61.5%) and 6 cases of unacceptable toxicity (3 at each Car dose). CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients with extensive SCLC, GemVin, GemEto, and GemCis are not enough active and do not merit further studies. Gem plus Car might deserve further attention.

Palonosetron in combination with 1-day versus 3-day dexamethasone for prevention of nausea and vomiting following moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: a randomized, multicenter, phase III trial.

PURPOSE: A phase III trial assessed the efficacy of palonosetron plus dexamethasone given once in preventing acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following a broad range of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) regimens. METHODS: This multicentre, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial evaluated two different treatment groups. One group received palonosetron (0.25 mg intravenously) and dexamethasone (8 mg intravenously) before chemotherapy, while the other was administered the same regimen on day 1 followed by dexamethasone 8 mg orally on days 2 and 3. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication) during the overall phase (days 1-5 after chemotherapy initiation). The non-inferiority margin was predefined as a 15% difference between groups in the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Of 332 chemotherapy-naïve patients included in the intention-to-treat analysis, 65.1% were female, and 35.2% received anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC)-based regimens. Overall CR rates were 67.5% for those administered dexamethasone only on day 1 (n = 166), and 71.1% for those also administered dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 (n = 166; difference -3.6% (95% confidence interval, -13.5 to 6.3)). CR rates were not significantly different between groups during the acute (0-24 h post-chemotherapy; 88.6% versus 84.3%; P = 0.262) and delayed phases (days 2-5; 68.7% versus 77.7%; P = 0.116). CONCLUSIONS: Palonosetron plus single-dose dexamethasone administered before common MEC regimens provide protection against acute and delayed CINV which is non-inferior to that of palonosetron plus dexamethasone for 3 days. However, the major benefit of the single-day regimen occurs in patients receiving non-AC MEC regimens.

Incidence and clinical implications of venous thromboembolism in advanced colorectal cancer patients: the 'GISCAD-alternating schedule' study findings.

AIM OF THE STUDY: To investigate the incidence and clinical implications of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC) patients treated and followed-up through a prospective randomised trial, comparing FOLFIRI chemotherapy given as an intermittent or as a continuous schedule. PATIENTS, MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 266 patients were randomised by 15 experimental centres: 168 (63.2%) were males, median age: 64.6 years, age range: 37-76 years. Almost all (95.5%) patients had metastatic disease, while the remainder were classified with locally advanced irresectable disease. For 138 (51.9%) of the patients, the chemotherapy treatment was intermittent FOLFIRI and the remaining patients received continuous treatment. All toxicities, including VTE, were prospectively collected. RESULTS: During the study protocol, the central data management gathered two cases of VTE. Our analysis retrieved 27 (10.2%) patients who developed a VTE, almost all (89%) during the course of chemotherapy treatment: 20 out of 27 during FOLFIRI, the remaining 7 during following lines or follow-up. VTE was the most frequent grade 3/4 toxicity. The incidence of VTE was significantly increased in the patients receiving continuous rather than intermittent treatment (HR 2.67, 95% CI 1.17-6.10; p<0.02). CONCLUSION: VTE is a common complication among advanced colorectal cancer patients and yet this type of toxicity is widely underestimated. In this randomised trial, VTE was the most frequent grade 3/4 toxicity. Use of an intermittent schedule is associated with a reduced risk of developing VTE.

The impact of antithrombotic prophylaxis on infectious complications in cancer patients with central venous catheters: an observational study.

Infections in cancer patients after implantation of a central venous device (CVD) are not infrequent and are potentially serious. The possibility of limiting this complication with antithrombotic drugs is still debated. For this observational study, we recorded the routine management of CVD in cancer patients in 18 oncology centers in Lombardy (northern Italy), assessing the effect of antithrombotic prophylaxis on catheter-related infections. Out of 1410 patients enrolled, 451 received antithrombotic prophylaxis continuously after implantation of the central line. During a median follow-up of 30 months, 57 catheter-related infections were reported in the 1390 patients seen at least once at follow-up visits (4.1% of the whole series), giving an overall incidence of 0.10 infections per 1000 catheter days. This complication was significantly more frequent among patients with an indwelling central venous catheter, or peripherally inserted catheter, than among those with a port device, and the group not given antithrombotic prophylaxis had 0.14 infective complications/1000 CVD days compared with 0.05/1000 CVD days (odds ratio 2.4; 95% confidence interval 1.7-5.0) for those treated. Antithrombotic prophylaxis protected against infections at the catheter exit site and track but not against systemic infections. Confirming earlier evidence, this study found a reduction in catheter-related infections in patients given antithrombotic prophylaxis. However, this reduction, reflecting local infections, seems unlikely to be one of the mechanisms explaining the lower mortality among our patients treated with anticoagulants.

Epirubicin-vinorelbine intravenous combination followed by oral vinorelbine as first-line treatment in metastatic breast cancer.

Epirubicin and vinorelbine are considered active drugs in metastatic breast cancer. The optimal duration of a chemotherapy regimen for metastatic breast cancer patients is still unknown. Nevertheless, epirubicin has a dose-limiting cardiotoxicity. Vinorelbine is also available as oral formulation. In a multicenter phase II study, we analyzed the feasibility and the efficacy of a maximum of six cycles of i.v. epirubicin plus vinorelbine, followed by oral vinorelbine. We enrolled 30 patients with metastatic breast cancer. Each patient received epirubicin (75 mg/m2 on day 1) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2 on days 1-8), every 3 weeks, for three cycles or six cycles in case of objective response or stable disease. When a clinical benefit was obtained, patients received oral vinorelbine (60 mg/m2 on days 1-8 every 3 weeks for three cycles). The regimen demonstrated to be active and well tolerated in metastatic breast cancer, and 6-8 months represented the optimal treatment duration. Maintenance therapy with oral vinorelbine was feasible, effective, safe and well accepted by the patients.

Immunochemotherapy with rituximab, vincristine and 5-day cyclophosphamide for heavily pretreated follicular lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Therapeutic options for relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma include combination chemotherapy, immunotherapy and, for selected patients, autotransplant. Because of the different mechanisms of action and non-overlapping toxicities, combination of rituximab with chemotherapy is a rational approach. METHODS: 30 patients with follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with advanced-stage disease were treated with four cycles of immunochemotherapy with rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, vincristine 2 mg i.v. on day 2 and cyclophosphamide 400 mg/m2 i.v. from days 2 to 6, repeated at 3-week intervals. All patients had received multiple lines of therapy (median 3); 9 (30%) had relapses (2 after high-dose therapy with autologous transplant), and 21 (70%) were in relapse and refractory to salvage treatment (with an anthracycline-containing regimen in 19). RESULTS: Of 29 patients evaluable for response, 16 (55 %) obtained a complete response (CR) and 3 (10%) a partial response (PR), with an overall response rate of 65% (19/29); 10 patients (35%) achieved less than PR. The median event-free survival was 16.1 months for all patients, being 22.8 months for responders. After a median follow-up of 2 years from the start of therapy (range 6 months to 3.8 years), of 16 patients who achieved CR, 10 remain free of disease. CONCLUSION: The combination of rituximab with vincristine and 5-day cyclophosphamide is able to produce CR in patients with advanced follicular lymphoma, even in patients resistant to third-generation regimens. The regimen designed on the basis of pharmacokinetics of the chimeric antibody seemed important for the clinical efficacy of the combination.

The VAD-DCEP sequence is an effective pre-transplant therapy in untreated multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Standard treatment for patients with multiple myeloma is debulking chemotherapy with non-alkylating agents followed by a regimen to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) and the transplantation of the mobilized, autologous PBSC. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a new regimen and compare it with that of a previous regimen. DESIGN AND METHODS: In a large cohort of 106 patients (group I) we administered a new pre-transplant program which includes 2 courses of pulsed-VAD (vincristine, adriamycin, dexamethasone) followed by 2 courses of DCEP (dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide and cis-platinum). We compared the efficacy of this new VAD-DCEP sequence, in terms of mobilizing capacity, toxicity and anti-myeloma activity in comparison with that of the previous VAD-high-dose cyclophosphamide program (group II, 40 patients). RESULTS: In group I 81/106 (76.4%) patients yielded >or= 4x10(6)/kg CD34+ cells, as did 30/40 (75%) in group II but with a significantly higher toxicity in this latter group. In detail, 9 patients in group I (8.5%) had WHO grade III neutropenia versus 35 in group II (87.5%), 5 patients of group I (4.7%) had grade III thrombocytopenia versus 12 patients in group II (30%), and 8 patients in group I (7.5%) experienced an infections fever versus 9 patients in group II (22.5%). Therefore, nearly all patients in group II had to be admitted to hospital (39/40, 97.5%). There was a higher percentage of responses (CR+VGPR+PR) in group I than in group II: 73% versus 50% (p=0.02). INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: the VAD-DCEP sequence has an adequate mobilizing capacity, without significant toxicity, and a good anti-myeloma activity, and therefore represents a safe and effective therapeutic approach for multiple myeloma patients at the onset of their disease.