Reducing renal function assessment prior to platinum-based chemotherapy: a real-world evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based chemotherapy, a widely used backbone of systemic cytotoxic anticancer treatment, is associated with nephrotoxicity. Currently, renal function is generally assessed prior to each administration of cisplatin or carboplatin, but there is no guideline regarding the frequency of renal function determination. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to determine the median time to a clinically relevant dosage adjustment (>10%) due to change in renal function in patients treated with cisplatin and carboplatin. Secondly, variables influencing changes in renal function were assessed. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of serial renal function assessments in platinum-treated patients with cancer in two academic medical centers, using a query to extract data from the electronic health records between 2017 and 2019. RESULTS: In total, 512 patients receiving cisplatin and 628 patients receiving carboplatin were included. In total, 15% of all cisplatin-treated patients were found to have a renal function less than 60 mL/min at least once during treatment, with a median time to renal function decline of 67 days (range 5-96 days), which did not differ between treatment regimens. For carboplatin 21% of patients were found to have had a dosage variation of more than 10% at least once during treatment, with a median time-to-event period of 64 days (range 5-100 days). INTERPRETATION: Dose adjustments during platinum-based chemotherapy resulting from renal function decline occur after a median time of ≥64 days. Our data provide substantiated guidance to recommend renal function assessment during platinum-based chemotherapy in clinically stable patients to once every 3 weeks.

Assessment of Swallowing Function in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma in High vs. Low Dose Cisplatin.

Cisplatin-based therapies are standard-of-care for advanced-stage head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Treatment regimens include 3 weeks of high-dose bolus cisplatin or 6-7 weeks of low-dose weekly cisplatin, both with concurrent radiation. The effects of cisplatin dosage on swallowing function warrant further study. A 237-patient cohort treated for HNSCC at a single center were studied retrospectively. Gastrostomy tube dependence served as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included weight changes, esophageal stricture, and lymphedema. The primary/secondary outcomes were not statistically significant; however, ototoxicity and renal toxicity were significantly higher in the high-dose group. These findings add insight into cisplatin dose-based functional outcomes.

Acute Kidney Injury after Multiple Cycles of Cisplatin Chemotherapy: A Nomogram for Risk Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) caused by cisplatin is common and has a higher incidence of multiple use, resulting in a poor short- and long-term prognosis for patients. There is currently no good premedication AKI risk assessment tool. The aim of this study was to establish an AKI risk assessment nomogram for patients with multiple cisplatin applications. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of patients who were treated with non-first-time cisplatin chemotherapy regimen at Changzhou Second People's Hospital affiliated to Nanjing Medical University from January 2016 to January 2022. All data from the development group were used to screen the impact factors of AKI via univariate and multivariate analyses. A nomogram was developed based on these impact factors and verified with verification group. The area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration curves, and decision curve analyses (DCAs) were used to evaluate the nomogram. RESULTS: Among the 256 patients enrolled in 450 cycles of chemotherapy, 282 were in the development cohort (97 AKI), and 168 were in the validation cohort (61 AKI). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that age, hypertension, diabetes, serum cystatin C (sCysC), urinary kidney injury molecule-1 (uKim1), and a single dose of cisplatin were independently associated with AKI. The results showed that our model yielded satisfied diagnostic performance with an AUC value of 0.887 and 0.906 using the development group and on verification group. The calibration plots and DCA showed the superior clinical applicability of the nomogram. These results were verified in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION: A nomogram combining functional (sCysC) and tubular (uKim1) injury biomarkers with conventional clinical factors might assess the risk of AKI after multiple cycles of cisplatin chemotherapy.

Real-World Treatment Outcomes, Healthcare Resource Use, and Costs Associated with Antiemetics Among Cancer Patients on Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a recognized adverse outcome among patients with cancer. This retrospective study aimed to quantify the treatment outcomes, resource utilization, and costs associated with antiemetic use to prevent CINV in a broad US population who received cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Data from the STATinMED RWD Insights Database was collected from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2020. Cohorts included any patients that had at least one claim for fosnetupitant + palonosetron (NEPA) or fosaprepitant + palonosetron (APPA) and evidence of initiating cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Logistic regression was used to evaluate nausea and vomiting visits within 14 days after chemotherapy, and generalized linear models were used to examine all-cause and CINV-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs. RESULTS: NEPA was associated with significantly lower rates of nausea and vomiting visits after chemotherapy (p = 0.0001), including 86% greater odds of nausea and vomiting events for APPA during the second week after chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.86; p = 0.0003). The mean numbers of all-cause inpatient visits (p = 0.0195) and CINV-related inpatient and outpatient visits were lower among NEPA patients (p < 0.0001). These differences corresponded to 57% of NEPA patients and 67% of APPA patients having one or more inpatient visits (p = 0.0002). All-cause outpatient costs and CINV-related inpatient costs were also significantly lower for NEPA (p < 0.0001). The mean number of all-cause outpatient visits, all-cause inpatient costs, and CINV-related outpatient costs was not significantly different between groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study based on claims data, NEPA was associated with lower rates of nausea and vomiting and lower CINV-related HCRU and costs compared to APPA following cisplatin-based chemotherapy. These results complement clinical trial data and published economic models supporting the use of NEPA as a safe, effective, and cost-saving antiemetic for patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Efficacy and Cost-effectiveness of Pegfilgrastim for Preventing Febrile Neutropenia During Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and 5-Fluorouracil Therapy for Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The docetaxel, 5-fluorouracil, and cisplatin (DCF) regimen is an effective form of chemotherapy for advanced esophageal cancer. However, the incidence of adverse events, such as febrile neutropenia (FN), is high. This study retrospectively examined whether pegfilgrastim treatment reduces FN development during DCF therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study evaluated 52 patients who were diagnosed with esophageal cancer and underwent DCF therapy at Jikei Daisan Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, between 2016 and 2020. They were divided into non-pegfilgrastim and pegfilgrastim-treated groups, and side-effects of chemotherapy and cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim were examined. RESULTS: Eighty-six cycles of DCF therapy were conducted (33 and 53 cycles, respectively). FN was observed in 20 (60.6%) and seven (13.2%) cases, respectively (p<0.001). The lowest absolute neutrophil count during chemotherapy was significantly lower in the non-pegfilgrastim group (p<0.001), and the number of days until improvement from nadir was significantly shorter in the pegfilgrastim group (9 vs. 11 days; p<0.001). No significant difference was found in the onset of grade 2 or more adverse events by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. However, renal dysfunction was significantly lower in the pegfilgrastim group (30.7% vs. 60.6%, p=0.038). Hospitalization costs were also significantly lower in this group (692,839 vs. 879,431 Japanese yen, p=0.028). CONCLUSION: This study revealed the usefulness and cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim in prevention of FN in patients treated with DCF.

Eficacia y seguridad de atezolizumab en pacientes adultos con cáncer pulmonar de células no pequeñas, metastásico, sin mutaciones de los genes EGFR o ALK, que progresaron a la primera línea de tratamiento con quimioterapia basada en platino / Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in adult patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer without egfr or alk gene mutations who progressed to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy treatment

ANTECEDENTES: En el marco de la metodología ad hoc para evaluar solicitudes de tecnologías sanitarias, aprobada mediante Resolución del Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación N° 111-IETSI-ESSALUD-2021, se ha elaborado el presente dictamen preliminar, el cual expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de atezolizumab en pacientes adultos con cáncer pulmonar de células no pequeñas (CPCNP), metastásico, sin mutaciones de los genes EGFR o ALK, que progresaron a la primera línea de tratamiento con quimioterapia basada en platino. Así, el Dr. Rodrigo Auqui Flores, médico especialista en oncología del Hospital Nacional Almanzor Aguinaga Asenjo y la Dra. Rebeca Serra Jaramillo, médica especialista en oncología del Hospital Nacional Guillermo Almenara Irigoyen, siguiendo la Directiva N° 003-IETSI-ESSALUD2016, envían al Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación ­ IETSI las solicitudes de autorización de uso del producto farmacéutico atezolizumab no incluido en el Petitorio Farmacológico de EsSalud. ASPECTOS GENERALES: En el 2020, el cáncer de pulmón fue la primera causa de muerte por cáncer a nivel mundial. En el Perú, en ese mismo año, el cáncer de pulmón se registró como la quinta causa de muerte por cáncer, con 2595 muertes registradas. (GLOBOCAN 2022). Sobre la incidencia del cáncer de pulmón, se reportó 1 206 771 casos nuevos a nivel mundial y 2888 casos nuevos en el Perú (GLOBOCAN 2022). Aproximadamente, el 85 % de los casos de cáncer de pulmón son CPCNP (American Society Cancer 2021). De estos pacientes, entre el 5 % y el 15 % expresan la mutación EGFR y entre el 4 % y el 6 % expresan la mutación ALK (Pikor et al. 2013). Los pacientes con CPCNP sin mutaciones en los genes conductores (ie. EGFR y ALK, entre otros), que se encuentran en etapa metastásica, y han recibido quimioterapia tienen una mediana de sobrevida de alrededor de 11.3 meses (Lim et al. 2018). METODOLOGÍA: Se llevó a cabo una búsqueda bibliográfica exhaustiva con el objetivo de identificar la mejor evidencia disponible sobre la eficacia y seguridad de atezolizumab en pacientes adultos con CPCNP, metastásico, sin mutaciones de los genes EGFR o ALK, que progresaron a la primera línea de tratamiento con quimioterapia basada en platino. La búsqueda bibliográfica se realizó en las bases de datos PubMed, The Cochrane Library y LILACS. Asimismo, se realizó una búsqueda manual dentro de las páginas web pertenecientes a grupos que realizan evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) y guías de práctica clínica (GPC) incluyendo el National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), la Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), el Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), el Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), el Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG por sus siglas en alemán), la International Database of GRADE Guideline, el Centro Nacional de Excelencia Tecnológica en Salud (CENETEC), la Guidelines International Network (GIN), National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), la Cancer Guidelines Database, el New Zealand Guidelines Group (NZGG), el Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS), el Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria (IECS), la Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas (BRISA), la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), el Ministerio de Salud del Perú (MINSA) y el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación (IETSI). Además, se realizó una búsqueda manual de GPC de las principales sociedades o instituciones especializadas en oncología, tales como: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), la Cancer Council Australia (CCA), la European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), la American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) y American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST). Finalmente, se realizó una búsqueda en la página web de registro de ensayos clínicos (EC) www.clinicaltrials.gov, para identificar EC en curso o cuyos resultados aún no hayan sido publicados en alguna revista científica. La búsqueda de literatura se limitó a GPC, ETS, revisiones sistemáticas de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados (ECA) y ECA de fase III que abordaran la pregunta PICO del presente dictamen. Se incluyeron las publicaciones en inglés y español. RESULTADOS: Luego de la búsqueda bibliográfica hasta marzo de 2022, se identificaron cuatro GPC elaboradas por la NCCN (NCCN 2022), la ESMO (Planchard et al. 2020), la ASCO (Hanna et al. 2020), el CENETEC (CENETEC 2019); tres ETS elaboradas por el NICE (NICE 2018), la CADTH (CADTH 2018) y el SMC (SMC 2018) y tres publicaciones provenientes de un ECA denominado OAK (Rittmeyer et al. 2017; Bordoni et al. 2018; Mazieres et al. 2021). CONCLUSIÓN: Por lo expuesto, el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación no aprueba el uso de atezolizumab para pacientes adultos con CPCNP, metastásico, sin mutaciones de los genes EGFR o ALK, que progresaron a la primera línea de tratamiento con quimioterapia basada en platino, como producto farmacéutico no incluido en el Petitorio Farmacológico de EsSalud.

Assessment of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity and its associated factors among cervical cancer patients in the leading tertiary hospital in Kenya.

INTRODUCTION: Cisplatin is the widely used antineoplastic agent in managing cervical cancer despite nephrotoxicity being a major concern. In addition, there was a paucity of data about the degree of nephrotoxicity due to cisplatin in the study setting. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the prevalence of cisplatin nephrotoxicity among cervical patients. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the Cancer Treatment Centre of Kenyatta National Hospital among 100 cervical cancer patients treated with a cisplatin regimen. Simple random sampling was employed to the recruit medical record of patients. This study used a data abstraction tool to extract the patients' relevant socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. The data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 25.0 software. Frequency tables and figures were used to present the findings of the study. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with cisplatin nephrotoxicity. RESULTS: The study showed a mean age of 52.09 ± 10.44 years. The prevalence rate of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity in cervical cancer patients was 45%. Of these patients, 36% and 9% patients had grade 1 and 2 nephrotoxicities, respectively. Comorbidities (crude odd's ratio (COR) = 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3-7.02, p = 0.011), hypertension (COR = 3.0, 95% CI = 1.1-7.8, p = 0.03), and more than three cycles of cisplatin treatment (adjusted odd's ratio = 4.5, 95% CI = 1.19-17.0, p = 0.027) were significant factors of nephrotoxicity. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity among cervical cancer patients was high in the study setting. Comorbidities, number of cycles and types of comorbidities were significant factors associated with cisplatin nephrotoxicity.

Eficacia y seguridad de olaparib como terapia de mantenimiento en pacientes con cáncer de ovario, de trompas de falopio, o peritoneal primario, recurrente, sensible a la quimioterapia basada en platino / Efficacy and safety of olaparib as maintenance therapy in patients with primary, recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer sensitive to platinum-based chemotherapy

ANTECEDENTES: En el marco de la metodología ad hoc para evaluar solicitudes de tecnologías sanitarias, aprobada mediante Resolución de Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación N° 111-IETSI-ESSALUD-2021, se ha elaborado el presente dictamen, el que expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de olaparib como terapia de mantenimiento en pacientes con cáncer de ovario, de trompas de Falopio, o peritoneal primario, recurrente, sensible a la quimioterapia basada en platino. Así, el Dr. Miguel Ángel Ticona Castro, médico especialista en oncología del Servicio de Oncología del Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati Martins de la Red Prestacional Rebagliati, siguiendo la Directiva N° 003-IETSI-ESSALUD-2016, envió al Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación ­ IETSI la solicitud de uso por fuera del petitorio del producto farmacéutico olaparib. ASPECTOS GENERALES: En el 2019, en Perú se diagnosticaron aproximadamente 1237 nuevos casos de cáncer de ovario, con 771 muertes atribuidas a la enfermedad (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation 2022). El cáncer de ovario epitelial seroso es la histología que se encuentra con más frecuencia en los cánceres de ovario avanzados, y entre 20 % y 30 % de los cánceres de ovario serosos de alto grado tienen la mutación del gen del cáncer de mama 1 o 2 (BRCA 1/2). El tratamiento estándar para el cáncer de ovario, de trompas de Falopio, o peritoneal primario (en lo sucesivo denominados colectivamente como cáncer de ovario) incluye la cirugía y la quimioterapia basada en platino. A pesar de las altas tasas de respuesta esperadas (75 % al 85 %), la recurrencia es probable en la mayoría de las mujeres. Si esta recurrencia ocurre seis meses o más después de la última quimioterapia basada en platino, los pacientes se clasifican como sensibles al platino. Tras la respuesta a la quimioterapia basada en platino, la estrategia de tratamiento estándar actual a nivel internacional es "observar y esperar" si se vuelve a dar una progresión de la enfermedad (CADTH 2017; Ray-coquard et al. 2020). METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática utilizando las bases de datos PubMed, Cochrane Library y LILACS. Además, se realizó una búsqueda dentro de bases de datos pertenecientes a grupos que realizan evaluaciones de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) y guías de práctica clínica (GPC), incluyendo el Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), el National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), la Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), la Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), el Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), el Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud de Colombia (IETS), la Comissáo Nacional de Incorporacáo de Tecnologias no Sistema Único de Saúde (CONITEC), entre otros. Asimismo, se revisó la Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas (BRISA) y páginas web de sociedades especializadas en el manejo del cáncer como la National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), la European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), la American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), y la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica (SEOM). Adicionalmente, se hizo una búsqueda en las páginas web del registro de ensayos clínicos administrado por la Biblioteca Nacional de Medicina de los Estados Unidos (https://clinicaltrials.gov/) y de la International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP) (https://apps.who.int/trialsearch/), para identificar ensayos clínicos en curso o cuyos resultados no hayan sido publicados. La búsqueda de literatura se limitó a GPC, ETS, revisiones sistemáticas con metaanálisis de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados (ECA) y ECA que abordaran la pregunta PICO del presente dictamen. Se incluyeron las publicaciones en inglés y español. Se excluyeron los ensayos clínicos no aleatorizados, los estudios observacionales, las series de casos, los reportes de casos, las cartas al editor, los comentarios, las editoriales y los resúmenes de congresos. Teniendo en cuenta que los datos finales de los estudios SOLO2 y Studyl9 (estudios pivotales de olaparib en cáncer de ovario recurrente) se publicaron recientemente, en marzo de 2021 y octubre de 2018, respectivamente, solo se incluyeron las revisiones sistemáticas con meta-análisis si incluían los datos finales de ambos estudios. En cuanto a las GPC, se priorizaron aquellas que utilizaron sistemas de gradación para el nivel de evidencia y el grado de las recomendaciones brindadas. RESULTADOS: La búsqueda de literatura permitió identificar 13 publicaciones que aportan información de relevancia para fines de la presente actualización: cuatro GPC realizadas por la NCCN (NCCN 2022), la SEOM (Redondo et al. 2021), la ASCO (Tew et al. 2020), y la ESMO (ESMO 2020); cinco ETS elaboradas por el NICE de Inglaterra y Gales (NICE 2020), el IQWiG de Alemania (IQWiG 2018), la CADTH de Canadá (CADTH 2017), el SMC de Escocia (SMC 2016), y la HAS de Francia (HAS 2015); y cuatro publicaciones de ECA: dos publicaciones del ECA de fase II Studyl9 (Ledermann et al. 2012; Friedlander et al. 2018) y dos publicaciones del ECA de fase III SOLO2 (Pujade-lauraine et al. 2017; Poveda et al. 2021). CONCLUSIÓN: Por todo lo expuesto, el IETSI no aprueba el uso de olaparib como terapia de mantenimiento para pacientes con cáncer de ovario, con o sin mutación BRCA, recurrente, sensible a la quimioterapia basada en platino, que hayan recibido al menos 2 líneas previas de quimioterapia basada en platino, con respuesta completa o parcial a su régimen más reciente.

Comparison of efficacy and toxicity of chemoradiation regimens for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma primary treatment.

BACKGROUND: The best chemoradiation regimen to treat locally and regionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is yet to be established. METHODS: We compared overall survival (OS) and adverse events following chemoradiation regimens (high-dose [HDC] or low-dose [LDC] cisplatin, or carboplatin [CB]) in HNSCC cases selected from SEER-Medicare linked database. RESULTS: Of the 1335 cases who underwent radiotherapy, 264 received HDC, 259 received LDC, and 353 received CB, concurrently. Compared to chemoradiation with HDC, using LDC or CB, or radiotherapy alone were associated with an increasingly worse OS; hazard ratios were 1.33, p = 0.03; 1.35, p = 0.02; and 2.12, p < 0.001; respectively. There were no differences in the rates of adverse events between the three chemoradiation regimens. CONCLUSION: Chemoradiation regimen using HDC appears to be the best primary treatment for locally and regionally advanced HNSCC. Nonetheless, prospective large studies are warranted to further determine its absolute benefit.

Assessment of Renal Function in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Treated with Cisplatin: Different Biomarkers and Acute Kidney Injury Classifications.

Cisplatin is associated with dose-limiting nephrotoxicity, and the timely detection of acute kidney injury (AKI) can affect morbimortality. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the tools for monitoring renal function in AKI. This was a retrospective, cohort study. Cisplatin-treated patients with head and neck cancer were included. Nephrotoxicity was assessed using serum creatinine, estimated creatinine clearance, serum electrolytic alterations, and plasma kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1). The toxicity severity was classified according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), and AKI was classified by Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, and End-stage kidney disease (RIFLE) and Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN). A total of 81 participants were included, of whom only 32 did not have AKI. Almost 90% of participants had a decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate five (D5) days after chemotherapy. The AKI estimate differs between AKIN and RIFLE; more participants were diagnosed by the RIFLE at D5, 19.5% versus 2.4% by AKIN, and fifteen had a discordance between these classifications. All laboratory markers showed significant changes on D5. KIM-1 appeared a possible biomarker when considering CTCAE or AKIN classifications (p < 0.05 on D5), but not when RIFLE classification was used (p = 0.0780). Further studies may seek to understand the profiles of different biomarkers together.

IAP Chemotherapy Regimen Is a Viable and Cost-effective Option in Children and Adolescents With Osteosarcoma: A Comparative Analysis With MAP Regimen on Toxicity and Survival.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin and doxorubicin are integral components of chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of osteosarcoma. Choice of third agent high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) or an alkylating agent such as ifosfamide is debatable. The present study compared the impact of MAP (HDMTX-doxorubicin-cisplatin) and IAP (ifosfamide-doxorubicin-cisplatin) chemotherapy regimens on toxicity and survival in children and adolescents with osteosarcoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study including patients 18 years and younger with osteosarcoma during the study period. Clinical, demographic, chemotherapy regimen, and surgical details and treatment-related toxicity were retrieved from hospital medical records. Prognostic factors affecting overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 102 patients included in the study, 59 (57.8%) and 43 (42.2%) patients were treated with MAP and IAP regimens, respectively. Two groups were comparable in terms of pretreatment characteristics and surgical treatment. Overall, 95.9% patients underwent limb salvage surgery. There was a statistically increased incidence in supportive care admissions and delay in starting the next cycle of chemotherapy in the MAP group. Among the MAP cohort, the 5-year OS and EFS were 62% and 55% compared with 47% and 44%, respectively, in the IAP cohort (P=0.143 and 0.316, respectively). On univariate and multivariate analyses, statistically significant factors affecting EFS of the whole group included tumor size, stage, site of metastasis, histologic necrosis, and type of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: OS and EFS with both regimens were similar. However, the MAP regimen was associated with a statistically significant increase in incidence of supportive care admissions, delay in next cycle of chemotherapy, and predicted higher cost of treatment.

Assessment of provider perspectives on otoprotection research for children and adolescents: A Children's Oncology Group Cancer Control and Supportive Care Committee survey.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin-induced hearing loss (CIHL) is a common and debilitating toxicity for childhood cancer survivors. Understanding provider perspectives is crucial to developing otoprotection studies that are both informative and feasible. Two international trials (ACCL0431 and SIOPEL6) investigated the drug sodium thiosulfate (STS) as an otoprotectant, but definitive interpretation of the findings of these trials has been challenging. Adoption of STS has therefore been uneven, and provider perspectives on its role are unknown. PROCEDURE: The Children's Oncology Group (COG) Cancer Control and Supportive Care Neurotoxicity Subcommittee therefore conducted a survey of providers at COG institutions to determine perspectives on pediatric otoprotection practices and research surrounding three major themes: (1) prevalence of routine use of STS with cisplatin-based regimens, (2) application of audiometry to cisplatin therapy, and (3) preferred modalities for otoprotection research. RESULTS: Survey respondents (45%, 44/98 surveyed institutions) were of diverse institutional sizes, practice settings, and geographical locations primarily in the United States and Canada. Overall, respondents considered CIHL an important toxicity and indicated strong enthusiasm for future studies (98%, 40/41). Results indicated that while STS was the current or planned standard of care in a minority of responding institutions (36%, 16/44), most sites were receptive to its inclusion in appropriate study designs. Application of audiometry for ototoxicity monitoring varied widely across sites. For otoprotection research, systemic agents were preferred (68%, 28/41) as compared with intratympanic approaches. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that pediatric otoprotection trials remain of interest to providers; the emphasis of these trials should remain on systemic and not intratympanic therapy.

Estimation versus measurement of the glomerular filtration rate for kidney function assessment in patients with cancer undergoing cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) assessment is indicated before every administration of cisplatin. The optimal modality for this purpose [GFR measurement by urinary Creatinine Clearance (uCrCl) versus GFR estimation (eGFR) by the CKD-EPI formula versus both] is unclear. We investigated whether eGFR only is safe in this setting. Paired uCrCl and eGFR determinations from 470 cisplatin cycles from 121 patients were analyzed [median age: 55 years; most frequent tumor site: genitourinary (45%); palliative treatment: n = 41 (34%)]. Primary endpoint was the proportion of cycles with uCrCl < 50 ml/min/1.73m2 and eGFR ≥ 50 ml/min/1.73m2 (i.e. a "false negative" result when only determining eGFR). The primary endpoint occurred in 8 of 470 cisplatin cycles (1.7%, 95%CI 0.5-2.9). In all 8 events, uCrCl was lower than eGFR (mean uCrCl vs. eGFR: 43 versus 112 ml/min/1.73m2). The uCrCl was re-measured in all patients, and showed normal results in all but 1 patient. None of these events precluded the administration of cisplatin at the planned date, and no subsequent cases of acute nephrotoxicity occurred. Overall agreement between uCrCl and eGFR was low, with qualitative analysis suggesting frequent incompliance with 24-h urine collection. We conclude that an eGFR is sufficient for assessing kidney function in patients with cancer undergoing cisplatin therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of Pembrolizumab for Patients with Advanced, Unresectable, or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Ineligible for Cisplatin-based Therapy.

BACKGROUND: There is an unmet need for effective therapies for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer who cannot tolerate cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Cisplatin-ineligible patients experience a high frequency of adverse events from the most commonly used standard of care treatment, carboplatin plus gemcitabine, or alternative treatment with gemcitabine monotherapy. Pembrolizumab is a potent, highly selective humanised monoclonal antibody that releases checkpoint inhibition of the immune response system, and provides a new alternative for these patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for first-line treatment of urothelial carcinoma ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy in patients with strongly PD-L1-positive tumours in Sweden. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Parametric survival curves were fitted to overall survival, progression-free survival, and time on treatment data from KEYNOTE-052 to extrapolate clinical outcomes. A simulated treatment comparison and a network meta-analysis were conducted to estimate the comparative efficacy of pembrolizumab versus carboplatin plus gemcitabine and gemcitabine monotherapy. EQ-5D data from KEYNOTE-052 were used to estimate utility, while resource use and cost inputs were estimated using Swedish regional pricing lists and clinician opinion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The model reported costs, life years, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and results were tested using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We estimated that pembrolizumab would improve survival by 2.11 and 2.16 years and increase QALYs by 1.71 and 1.75 compared to carboplatin plus gemcitabine and gemcitabine monotherapy, respectively. Pembrolizumab was associated with a cost increase of €90520 versus carboplatin plus gemcitabine and €95055 versus gemcitabine, with corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €53055/QALY and €54415/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: At a willingness-to-pay threshold of €100000/QALY, pembrolizumab is a cost-effective treatment versus carboplatin plus gemcitabine and versus gemcitabine. PATIENT SUMMARY: This is the first analysis to show that pembrolizumab is a cost-effective option for first-line treatment of cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in Sweden.

Eficacia y seguridad de pembrolizumab en el tratamiento del cáncer gástrico avanzado PD-L1 >1% y con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previas, basadas en fluoropirimidinas y platinos / Efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer PD-L1 >1% and with disease progression to at least two prior lines of chemotherapy, based on fluoropyrimidines and platinums

INTRODUCCIÓN: El presente dictamen expone la evaluación del uso de pembrolizumab para el tratamiento del cáncer gástrico avanzado PD-L1 >1 % con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previa. Eficacia y seguridad de pembrolizumab en el tratamiento del cáncer gástrico avanzado pd-l1 >1% y con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previas, basadas en fluoropirimidinas y platinos. El cáncer gástrico (CG) es el quinto cáncer más frecuente en el mundo, después del de pulmón, mama, colon/recto y próstata. El subtipo histológico más común es el adenocarcinoma (~95 %). Aunque los casos en estadios localizados son curables, la mayoría de los pacientes se presentan en estadios avanzados con pobre pronóstico. Los pacientes con enfermedad avanzada o metastásica pueden recibir quimioterapia con el objetivo de paliar los síntomas, mejorar la calidad de vida y prolongar la sobrevida global (SG). La quimioterapia (QT) a base de la combinación de fluoropirimidina con un platino es el régimen estándar de primera línea. A partir de la segunda y subsecuentes líneas de tratamiento no existe un régimen estándar y las guías consultadas recomiendan el uso de taxanos (docetaxel y paclitaxel) e irinotecán como opciones de tratamiento de rescate. La elección de alguna de ellas dependerá de los tratamientos previos. Pembrolizumab es otro agente que los médicos especialistas han propuesto, por ello el objetivo del presente dictamen es la evaluación de la mejor evidencia respecto a los efectos de beneficio clínico y de daño del uso de pembrolizumab en el tratamiento del cáncer gástrico avanzado PD-L1 >1 % y con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previas, basadas en fluoropirimidinas y platinos. Pembrolizumab es un anticuerpo IgG monoclonal humanizado anti-PDL1 que recientemente recibió aprobación acelerada por parte de la Food and Drug Administration (FDA) para ser usado en pacientes con adenocarcinoma gástrico o de la UGE (unión gastroesofágica), metastásico y progresivo a dos o más terapias sistémicas. Sin embargo, su contraparte en Europa, la European Medicines Agency (EMA), no ha autorizado su uso para esa misma indicación. METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una búsqueda de la literatura con respecto a la eficacia y seguridad de uso de pembrolizumab en el tratamiento del cáncer gástrico avanzado PD-L1 >1 % y con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previas. Esta búsqueda se realizó utilizando los meta-buscadores: Translating Research into Practice (TRIPDATABASE), National Library of Medicine (PubMed-Medline) y Health Systems Evidence. Adicionalmente, se amplió la búsqueda revisando la evidencia generada por grupos internacionales que realizan revisiones sistemáticas (RS), evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) y guías de práctica clínica (GPC), tales como la Cochrane Group, The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (AHRQ), The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) y The Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC). Esta búsqueda se completó ingresando a la página web www.clinicaltrials.gov, para así poder identificar ensayos clínicos en elaboración o que no hayan sido publicados aún y así disminuir el riesgo de sesgo de publicación. RESULTADOS: Se realizó la búsqueda bibliográfica y de evidencia científica para el sustento del uso de pembrolizumab en el tratamiento del cáncer gástrico avanzado PD-L1 >1 % y con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previas. CONCLUSIONES: El estudio Keynote 059 fue un estudio de fase II, abierto y sin grupo comparador que mostró que pembrolizumab tenía actividad antitumoral medida mediante la TRO y de manera secundaria se estimó una SG aproximada de 5.6 meses. La aprobación acelerada que otorgó la FDA se basó en el supuesto de que existía una correlación entre TRO y sobrevida, pero la FDA no realizó ningún análisis formal para validar este supuesto a través de la inclusión de varios ECA y en el contexto preciso. Por ello, el sustento por el que la FDA asume que existe una potencial correlación subrogado-sobrevida es laxo y poco riguroso. Existen razones importantes de por qué los subrogados podrían no correlacionarse con la SG para los nuevos agentes oncológicos. Por ejemplo, mientras la sobrevida global se estima de manera precisa mediante la fecha de muerte de los pacientes, la tasa de respuesta objetiva (medida con radiografías) depende de varios factores, como la interpretación del lector, el error de la medición, el sesgo de evaluación y el sesgo por perdida de pacientes. Los estudios de fase II abiertos y sin grupo de comparación suponen un bajo nivel de evidencia, por ello sus resultados son considerados como preliminares. En un ensayo de fase II solo se requiere que el desenlace primario represente algún tipo de actividad como la tasa de respuesta objetiva tal como en el estudio Keynote 059. Los estándares de evidencia de la FDA son cada vez más flexibles y la realización de ensayos confirmatorios no siempre provee evidencia definitiva de beneficio terapéutico. De acuerdo a una reciente revisión sistemática de aprobaciones aceleradas en agentes oncológicos la FDA aceptó datos de ensayos de un solo brazo, (no aleatorizados, no comparativos) como evidencia suficiente. Existe información de baja calidad metodológica, del uso de otras opciones terapéuticas con resultados similares en la SG a los observados en el estudio Keynote 059. Varios estudios, la mayoría retrospectivos, sin grupo control, han reportado una mediana de SG entre 4 y 7 meses después del uso de quimioterapia en base a taxanos (docetaxel y paclitaxel) e irinotecán, usados como monoterapia o en combinación y que se encuentran disponibles en la institución. En línea con ello, la guía ESMO 2016 recomienda de manera fuerte el uso de varios agentes incluyendo a los taxanos e irinotecán como tratamiento de segunda y subsecuentes líneas, aunque la evidencia es más sólida en los casos de segunda línea. Hasta la fecha, no existe evidencia de que pembrolizumab sea superior en términos de ganancia en la sobrevida global o mejora de la calidad, respecto a la QT o mejor terapia de soporte. Su disponibilidad por parte de la FDA se ha basado en la demostración de su actividad tumoral, pero se desconoce cuál es su eficacia relativa en desenlaces clínicos significativos. Una importante proporción de pacientes (cerca de la mitad) ha sufrido de efectos adversos serios, algunos de ellos fatales, con el uso de pembrolizumab como tratamiento de tercera línea. Asimismo, se observaron reacciones mediadas inmunológicamente como hipotiroidismo, hipertiroidismo y colitis. No se han identificado estudios que hayan comparado pembrolizumab con quimioterapia o tratamiento de soporte en el tratamiento de cáncer gástrico avanzado PD-L1 >1 % con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previas. Por lo que permanece la incertidumbre sobre si existe algún beneficio, en términos de desenlaces clínicos de relevancia desde la perspectiva del paciente, atribuible a pembrolizumab. Adicional a ello, se ha observado un alto porcentaje de eventos adversos serios, de los cuales el 8% resultaron en casos fatales. Por último, existen estudios, aunque de baja calidad metodológica, donde se ha reportado una mediana de SG entre 4 a 7 meses con el uso de agentes quimioterapéuticos (e.g., taxanos e irinotecán), similar a la mediana de SG encontrada con pembrolizumab en el estudio Keynote 059 (5.6 meses; IC 95% 4.3-6.9). En línea con ello, la guía ESMO 2016 recomienda de manera fuerte el uso de varios agentes incluyendo a los taxanos e irinotecán como tratamiento de segunda y subsecuentes líneas, aunque la evidencia es más sólida en los casos de segunda línea. Así, a la fecha no existen argumentos técnicos que permitan justificar el uso de pembrolizumab en la población de interés del presente documento. Por lo expuesto, el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación IETSI no aprueba el uso de pembrolizumab en el tratamiento del cáncer gástrico avanzado PD-L1 >1 % y con progresión de enfermedad al menos a dos líneas de quimioterapia previas, basadas en fluoropirimidinas y compuestos de platino.

Cost-utility analysis of palonosetron in the antiemetic regimen for cisplatin-containing highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Japan.

BACKGROUND: An antiemetic triplet regimen of 5-hydrotryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant is the standard prophylaxis with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). A randomized phase III trial comparing palonosetron (PALO) versus granisetron (GRA) in the triplet antiemetic regimen (The TRIPLE study) showed the superiority of PALO over GRA for delayed-phase vomiting in patients receiving cisplatin-based HEC. However, economic efficiency evaluations including quality of life have not been done. The present study was a cost-utility analysis of PALO within the Japanese medical insurance system. METHODS: The data source was the results of the TRIPLE study. A decision tree was constructed to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the medical service fees and the drug price for 2018 from the perspective of the payer. A one-way sensitivity analysis and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of the model. A threshold analysis was performed to determine the cost-effective price of PALO. RESULTS: In the base case, the estimated incremental effect of PALO addition was 0.000645 QALYs, the estimated incremental cost was 10,455 JPY (93.21 USD), and the ICER was 16,204,591 JPY QALY (144,465 USD/QALY). In the PSA, the probability of superior cost-effectiveness was 3.64%. In the threshold analysis, the acceptable price of PALO was estimated to be 7,743 JPY (69.03 USD). CONCLUSIONS: If willingness-to-pay is taken as 5,000,000 JPY/QALY (44,575 USD/QALY), the antiemetic regimen using PALO for cisplatin-containing HEC was not cost-effective at this time. The cost of drugs, with the arrival of inexpensive generic drugs, will make a major contribution to its cost-effectiveness.

Prophylactic antibiotics reduce hospitalisations and cost in locally advanced head and neck cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy: A randomised phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) induces a high rate of acute toxicity, including dysphagia and aspiration pneumonia. We hypothesised that prophylactic antibiotics can prevent pneumonia and hospitalisations and can be cost-effective. PATIENT AND METHODS: In this multicentre randomised trial, patients with LAHNC treated with chemoradiotherapy received prophylactic amoxicillin/clavulanic acid from day 29 after the start of treatment until 14 days after completion of chemoradiotherapy or standard care without prophylaxis. The primary objective was to observe a reduction in pneumonias. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the hospitalisation rate, adverse events, costs and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: One hundred six patients were included; of which, 95 were randomised: 48 patients were allocated to the standard group and 47 patients to the prophylaxis group. A pneumonia during chemoradiotherapy and follow-up until 3.5 months was observed in 22 (45.8%) of 48 patients in the standard group and in 22 (46.8%) of 47 patients in the prophylaxis group (p = 0.54). Hospitalisation rate was significantly higher in the standard group versus the prophylaxis group, 19 of 48 pts (39.6%) versus 9 of 47 pts (19.1%), respectively (p = 0.03). Significantly more episodes with fever of any grade were observed in the standard group (29.2% vs 10.2%, p = 0.028). A significant difference in costs was found, with an average reduction of €1425 per patient in favour of the prophylaxis group. CONCLUSION: Although prophylactic antibiotics during chemoradiotherapy for patients with LAHNC did not reduce the incidence of pneumonias, it did reduce hospitalisation rates and episodes with fever significantly and consequently tended to be cost-effective.

Assessment of nephrotoxicity associated with combined cisplatin and mitomycin C usage in laparoscopic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been used to treat various peritoneal malignancies. Cisplatin and mitomycin C (MMC) are agents commonly used in these procedures and, individually, each has been associated with acute kidney injury (AKI). There is limited literature on the complications associated with the use of both agents in HIPEC. Therefore, we sought to determine the incidence of nephrotoxicity and electrolyte abnormalities in patients undergoing laparoscopic HIPEC using this chemotherapeutic combination. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients undergoing laparoscopic HIPEC for gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma using both cisplatin and MMC. Sodium thiosulfate was given for renal protection and kidney function was evaluated daily up to postoperative day #2. Details regarding patient characteristics, selection criteria, chemotherapeutic regimen, perioperative lab values and anesthetic management were collected. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients underwent 31 laparoscopic HIPEC procedures. Fifteen (65%) were male and the median age was 57 (range 21-75). Thirteen procedures were associated with an elevation in creatinine (Cr) with the median difference between POD#2 and baseline being 0.09 mg/dL (range 0-0.43). The glomerular filtration rate median difference between POD#2 and baseline was -17 mL/min/1.37 sq. m (range -42 to 11). No cases demonstrated AKI, defined as a 50% increase in Cr levels above baseline. An 84% incidence of postoperative hypophosphatemia (26/31) and 94% incidence of postoperative hypocalcemia (29/31) was observed. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach to HIPEC using both cisplatin and MMC in our cohort was not associated with an increased incidence of AKI. The incidence of hypophosphatemia and hypocalcemia needs further evaluation to determine the exact etiology. Precis' statement: We retrospectively studied the association of AKI with the combined use of cisplatin and MMC in laparoscopic HIPEC.

Cost-minimization analysis of GSTP1c.313A>G genotyping for the prevention of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting: A Bayesian inference approach.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are concerning adverse events resulting from cancer treatment, and current guidelines recommend the use of neurokinin-1-selective antagonists, such as fosaprepitant, in highly emetogenic schemes. However, the implementation of this strategy may be limited by the cost of treatment. GSTP1 c.313A>G genotype was recently described as a predictor of vomiting related to high-dose cisplatin. We hypothesized that the inclusion of routine GSTP1 c.313A>G screening may be promising in financial terms, in contrast to the wide-spread use of fosaprepitant. METHODS: A cost-minimization analysis was planned to compare GSTP1 c.313A>G genotyping versus overall fosaprepitant implementation for patients with head and neck cancer under chemoradiation therapy with high-dose cisplatin. A decision analytic tree was designed, and conditional probabilities were calculated under Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations using the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. The observed data included patients under treatment without fosaprepitant, while priors were derived from published studies. RESULTS: To introduce screening with real-time polymerase chain reaction, an initial investment of U$ 39,379.97 would be required, with an amortization cost of U$ 7,272.97 per year. The mean cost of standard therapy with fosaprepitant is U$ 243.24 per patient, and although the initial cost of routine genotyping is higher, there is a tendency of progressive minimization at a threshold of 155 patients (Credible interval-CI: 119 to 216), provided more than one sample is incorporated for simultaneous analysis. A resulting reduction of 35.83% (CI: 30.31 to 41.74%) in fosaprepitant expenditures is then expected with the implementation of GSTP1 c.313A>G genotyping. CONCLUSION: GSTP1 c.313A>G genotyping may reduce the use of preventive support for chemotherapy induced nausea and lower the overall cost of treatment. Despite the results of this simulation, randomized, interventional studies are required to control for known and unknown confounders as well as unexpected expenses.

Translational Assessment of Drug-Induced Proximal Tubule Injury Using a Kidney Microphysiological System.

Drug-induced kidney injury, a major cause of acute kidney injury, results in progressive kidney disease and is linked to increased mortality in hospitalized patients. Primary injury sites of drug-induced kidney injury are proximal tubules. Clinically, kidney injury molecule-1, an established tubule-specific biomarker, is monitored to assess the presence and progression of injury. The ability to accurately predict drug-related nephrotoxicity preclinically would reduce patient burden and drug attrition rates, yet state-of-the-art in vitro and animal models fail to do so. In this study, we demonstrate the use of kidney injury molecule-1 measurement in the kidney microphysiological system as a preclinical model for drug toxicity assessment. To show clinical relevance, we use quantitative systems pharmacology computational models for in vitro-in vivo translation of the experimental results and to identify favorable dosing regimens for one of the tested drugs.