Impact of early palliative care on additional line of chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients: results from the randomized study OSS.

PURPOSE: The most appropriate criteria and timing for palliative care referral remain a critical issue, especially in patients with metastatic breast cancer for whom long-term chemosensibility and survival are observed. We aimed to compare the impact of early palliative care including formal concertation with oncologists on decision for an additional line of chemotherapy compared with usual oncology care. METHODS: This randomized prospective study enrolled adult women with metastatic breast cancer and visceral metastases with a 3rd- or 4th-line chemotherapy (CT). Patients received usual oncology care with a palliative care consultation only upon patient or oncologist request (standard group, S) or were referred to systematic palliative care consultation including a regular concertation between palliative care team and oncologists (early palliative care group, EPC). The primary endpoint was the rate of an additional CT (4th or 5th line) decision. Quality of life, symptoms, social support and satisfaction were self-evaluated at 6 and 12 months, at treatment discontinuation or 3 months after discontinuation. RESULTS: From January 2009 to November 2012, two authorized cancer centers included 98 women (EPC: 50; S: 48). Thirty-seven (77.1%, 95%CI 62.7-88%) patients in the EPC group had a subsequent chemotherapy prescribed and 36 (72.0%, 95%CI 57.5-83.8%) in the S group (p = 0.646). No differences in symptom control and global quality of life were observed, but less deterioration in physical functioning was reported in EPC (EPC: 0 [- 53-40]; S: - 6; 7 [- 60 to - 20]; p = 0.027). Information exchange and communication were significant improved in EPC (exchange, EPC: - 8.3 [- 30 to + 7]; S: 0.0 [- 17 to + 23]; p = 0.024; communication, EPC: 12.5 [- 8 to - 37]; S: 0.0 [- 21 to + 17]; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: EPC in metastatic breast cancer patients did not impact the prescription rate of additional chemotherapy in patients a 3rd- or 4th-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer; however, EPC may contribute to alleviate deterioration in physical functioning, while facilitating communication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT00905281, May 20, 2009.

First-line Bevacizumab and Paclitaxel for HER2-negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A French Retrospective Observational Study.

AIM: To assess outcomes in patients treated with first-line bevacizumab-containing therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC) at a single centre with a homogenous standard-of-care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Information on patient and disease characteristics, efficacy, and safety was extracted from computer-based records of all patients receiving first-line bevacizumab-paclitaxel at the Curie Institute, Paris, France, between 2008 and 2011. RESULTS: Median progression-free survival in the 116 treated patients was 13.2 months; median overall survival was 38.4 months. Corresponding values were 9.0 and 18.8 months, respectively, in patients with triple-negative mBC, and 19.4 and 58.8 months, respectively, in patients receiving maintenance endocrine therapy. No new safety signals were seen. CONCLUSION: Outcomes in patients treated with bevacizumab-paclitaxel at our center were consistent with efficacy in prospective clinical trials, with notable activity in poor-prognosis disease. Maintenance endocrine or oral therapy with bevacizumab after paclitaxel discontinuation was associated with long-term disease control.

Ocular adverse events of molecularly targeted agents approved in solid tumours: a systematic review.

When using molecularly targeted agents (MTAs), oncologists and patients face new and sometimes unexpected toxicities. Though ocular adverse events (OAEs) are not uncommon with chemotherapy, they are rarely severe or dose limiting. Ocular toxicity profile may differ with MTAs, indeed severe and dose limiting toxicities have been described with targeted therapies currently under investigation. Our study aimed to review OAEs experienced with MTAs approved in solid tumours. This review revealed that many OAEs, frequent and potentially severe, exist and concern most MTAs. The suggestion is prompt referral of patients with severe pain and/or visual impairment to the ophthalmologist since these symptoms can be associated with potentially severe OAE and need ophthalmic assessment. Oncologists must be aware of such events and their potential severity for better treatment and better diagnosis in daily practice as well as in clinical trials.

Heterogeneity in the definition of dose-limiting toxicity in phase I cancer clinical trials of molecularly targeted agents: a review of the literature.

AIM: There is no consensus about what constitutes a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in phase I cancer clinical trials. We aimed to evaluate how DLTs are defined in phase I trials of molecularly targeted agents (MTA). METHODS: We retrieved all phase I trials testing monotherapy with an MTA published over the last decade. In each trial, all items used to define DLTs were recorded. RESULTS: Reports of 155 phase I trials evaluating 111 different MTAs were reviewed. The most frequent determinant of whether a toxicity was regarded as a DLT was severity, usually assessed using the NCI CTCAE classification. However, for any given toxicity, there was substantial variability in the degree of severity required for a toxicity to be considered a DLT. Specifications about minimum duration of toxicity, degree of reversibility, the need to delay treatment and to reduce dose-intensity because of toxicity were infrequently incorporated in the definition of DLT. The definition of DLT varied with administration schedule. Discrepancies between the initial and the final definition of DLT were reported in 25% of trials. CONCLUSIONS: While our results do not support a standardisation of the definition of DLT, the inclusion of following specifications in its definition when relevant would reduce the heterogeneity observed across trials: (1) DLT assessment period, (2) absolute severity according to NCI CTCAE classification as well as severity relative to baseline status, (3) minimum duration of toxicity, (4) reversibility of toxicity within a certain period of time, and (5) necessity to delay treatment or to reduce dose-intensity.