Predicting Chemotherapy Toxicity and Death in Older Adults with Colon Cancer: Results of MOST Study.

PURPOSE: Older patients with colon cancer (CC) are vulnerable to chemotherapy toxicity and death. Establishing simple scores specific for patients with CC to predict severe chemotoxicity or early death is needed to select the best treatment strategy. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: This prospective multicenter study included patients aged ≥70 years with CC receiving adjuvant or first-line metastatic chemotherapy. Frailty markers (nutrition, physical activity, energy, mobility, strength), comprehensive geriatric assessment (functional status, comorbidities, falls, nutrition, cognition, and depression), and usual laboratory parameters were collected. Logistic or Cox regression was used to examine at 500 days the association between frailty markers, comprehensive geriatric assessment, laboratory parameters, and grade 3-4 toxicity or death. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients (median age, 79.0 years) received adjuvant (37.1%) or metastatic (62.9%) chemotherapy. During the first 500 days, grade 3-4 toxicity occurred in 49.5%, and 30% died. The predictive model for grade 3-4 toxicity combined (polychemotherapy × 3) + (hypoalbuminemia <32 g/L × 2) + (abnormal grip strength × 1.5) + C-reactive protein >11 mg/L + Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS), cutoff score >3. The predictive model for death combined (metastasis × 5) + (age × 2) + alkaline phosphatase >100 IU/mL + sex (female) + abnormal grip strength + ECOG-PS, cutoff score >6. For chemotoxicity prediction, sensitivity was 81.6% and specificity 71.4%. For death prediction, sensitivity was 89.7% and specificity was 83.6%. CONCLUSION: These simple and efficient "ColonPrediscores" will help to better identify older patients with CC with increased risk of chemotherapy-related toxicity and/or death. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The two scores assessed in this study, called "ColonPrediscores", offer a major advantage in that they do not need a previous complete geriatric assessment, which makes them an easy-to-use tool in oncologic settings.

Zarzio®, biosimilar of filgrastim, in prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in routine practice: a French prospective multicentric study.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a serious and potentially life-threatening consequence of cancer treatment. Prophylactic treatment with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) decreases the incidence of febrile neutropenia, the rate of hospitalization, and the use of antibiotics in patients at risk. The aim of this study was to assess efficacy, safety, and use of Zarzio(®)-biosimilar of Neupogen(®) (G-CSF; filgrastim)-in prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in current practice in cancer patients. METHODS: We conducted an observational, prospective, longitudinal, and multicentric study in France. The incidence of neutropenia was evaluated at each cycle of chemotherapy. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-four patients (women, 64.7 %; mean age, 61.7 years) with solid tumor (89.7 %; breast cancer, 50.5 %) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (10.3 %) were included. The risk of febrile neutropenia based on chemotherapy regimen was >20 % for 32.1 % of patients. No case of febrile neutropenia was reported. Neutropenia was the cause of hospitalization and/or antibiotic therapy in 10 patients. The most frequent adverse events related to Zarzio(®) were pain, in particular bone pain. No serious adverse event related to Zarzio(®) was reported. CONCLUSION: The results obtained in real-life conditions confirm that Zarzio(®) is efficient and well tolerated in cancer patients.

BiOsimilaRs in the management of anaemia secondary to chemotherapy in HaEmatology and Oncology: results of the ORHEO observational study.

BACKGROUND: The approval of epoetin biosimilars in the European Union requires extensive scientific evaluation and stringent regulatory procedures, including post-marketing studies. The ORHEO (place of biOsimilaRs in the therapeutic management of anaemia secondary to chemotherapy in HaEmatology and Oncology) study was an observational, longitudinal, multicentre study performed in France to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biosimilar epoetins for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA) in the clinical setting. METHODS: Patients >18 years with CIA (haemoglobin [Hb] <11 g/dL) in association with solid tumours, lymphoma or myeloma and eligible for treatment with an epoetin biosimilar were included in this study. Patient characteristics were recorded at baseline along with anaemia-related information, such as observed and target Hb (as chosen by the treating clinician), brand and dose of epoetin biosimilar prescribed, and details of any other treatments. Patients were then followed-up at 3 and 6 months. The primary endpoint was Hb response (defined as Hb reaching ≥10 g/dL, an increase of Hb ≥1 g/dL since inclusion visit or reaching physician-defined target Hb, with no blood transfusions in the 3 weeks prior to measurement). Other endpoints included adverse events, achievement of target Hb and associated treatments. RESULTS: Overall, 2333 patients >18 years (mean age 66.5 years) with CIA (haemoglobin [Hb] <11 g/dL) in association with solid tumours, lymphoma or myeloma and eligible for biosimilar epoetin treatment were included. 99.9% of patients received epoetin zeta (median dose 30,000 IU/week). Mean baseline Hb was 9.61 g/dL, with 35.6% of patients having moderate anaemia (Hb 8-9.5 g/dL). Hb response was achieved in 81.6% and 86.5% of patients at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Overall mean change in Hb level was 1.52 ± 1.61 and 1.72 ± 1.61 g/dL at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Transfusion and thromboembolic event rates were 9.4% and 2.4% at 3 months, and 5.8% and 1.5% at 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Epoetin zeta was effective and well tolerated in the management of CIA in patients with solid tumours, lymphoma and myeloma. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02140736 (date of registration: 14 May 2014).

Lethal toxicities after capecitabine intake in a previously 5-FU-treated patient: why dose matters with dihydropryimidine dehydrogenase deficiency.

Dihydropryimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is a pharmacogenetic syndrome associated with severe or lethal toxicities with oral capecitabine. Usually, patients with history of 5-FU-based therapy with no signs for life-threatening toxicities are considered as not DPD-deficient individuals who can be safely treated next with capecitabine if required. Here we describe the case of a woman originally treated with standard FEC100 protocol for metastatic breast cancer with little severe toxicities but grade-3 mucosities that were quickly resolved by symptomatic treatment. When switched to capecitabine + vinorelbine combo, extremely severe toxicities with fatal outcome were unexpectedly observed. Pharmacogenetic investigations were performed on cytidine deaminase and DPYD, and showed that this patient was heterozygous for the 2846A>T mutation on the DPYD gene. DPD phenotyping (i.e., uracil plasma levels >250 ng/ml, dihydrouracil/uracil ratio <0.5) confirmed that this patient was profoundly DPD deficient. Differences in fluoropyrimidine dosing between FEC100 (i.e., 500 mg/m2 5-FU) and capecitabine (i.e., 2250 mg daily) could explain why initial 5-FU-based protocol did not lead to life-threatening toxicities, whereas capecitabine rapidly triggered toxic death. Overall, this case report suggests that any toxicity, even when not life threatening, should be considered as a warning signal for possible underlying profound DPD deficiency syndrome, especially with low-dose protocols.

PREDOMOS study, impact of a social intervention program for socially isolated elderly cancer patients: update to the study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Social isolation potentiates the risk of death by cancer in the older cancer patient population. The PREDOMOS study investigates the impact of establishing a Program of Social intervention associated with techniques of Domotic and Remote assistance on the improvement of quality of life of older isolated patients, treated for locally advanced or metastatic cancer. This paper updates the pilot trial protocol. METHODS/DESIGN: The original protocol was published in Trials, accessible at https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-017-1894-7 . This update reports on the eligibility criteria expansion and on the adjunction of a cost-utility analysis. We widened the eligible population to patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer including malignant hemopathies (except acute myeloid leukemia) and to patients in the first and second lines of oncologic treatment. We restricted the inclusion to patients with a Mini Mental State Examination score strictly over 24. In addition to the secondary outcomes outlined in the protocol, a medico-economic analysis has been added to evaluate both the health benefits and costs of the two strategies and calculate the incremental cost-utility ratio of the innovative program assessed, compared to the standard practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02829762 . Registered on 29 June 2016.

PREDOMOS study, impact of a social intervention program for socially isolated elderly cancer patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence and social isolation increase along with advanced age, and social isolation potentiates the relative risk of death by cancer. Once spotted, social isolation can be averted with the intervention of a multidisciplinary team. Techniques of automation and remote assistance have already demonstrated their positive impact on falls prevention and quality of life (QoL), though little is known about their impact on socially isolated elderly patients supported for cancer. The primary objective of the PREDOMOS study is to evaluate the impact of establishing a Program of Social intervention associated with techniques of Domotic and Remote assistance (PS-DR) on the improvement of QoL of elderly isolated patients, treated for locally advanced or metastatic cancer. The secondary objectives include treatment failure, tolerance, survival, and autonomy. METHODS/DESIGN: This trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label, two-parallel group study. The setting is 10 French oncogeriatric centers. Inclusion criteria are patients aged at least 70 years with a social isolation risk and a histological diagnosis of cancer, locally advanced or metastatic disease. The groups are (1) the control group, receiving usual care; (2) the experimental group, receiving usual care associating with monthly social assistance, domotic, and remote assistance. Participants are randomized in a 1:1 allocation ratio. Evaluation times involve inclusion (randomization) and follow-up (12 months). The primary endpoint is QoL at 3 months (via European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ C30); secondary endpoints are social isolation, time to treatment failure, toxicity, dose response-intensity, survival, autonomy, and QoL at 6 months. For the sample size, 320 individuals are required to obtain 90% power to detect a 10-point difference (standard deviation 25) in QoL score between the two groups (20% loss to follow-up patients expected). DISCUSSION: The randomized controlled design is the most appropriate design to demonstrate the efficacy of a new experimental strategy (Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group classification). National and international recommendations could be updated based on the findings of this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02829762 . Registered on 29 June 2016.

[Update on screening, diagnosis and treatment of cancer of the prostate]. / Actualités sur le dépistage, le diagnostic et le traitement des cancers de prostate.

Recent progress in management of prostate cancer concern screening and treatment. The use of PSA and rectal examination advances the diagnosis by 5 to 10 years and shift the stage at the time of diagnosis toward curative localized intraprostatic disease. The impact of systematic screening remains controversial. However, individual screening explains, at least in part, the decrease of specific mortality due to prostatic cancer, recently observed in USA. PSA and lymphadenectomy have also contributed to a better selection of patients referred for local treatment by prostatectomy or radiotherapy. Radical prostatectomy is recommended for patients before 70 with T2 or less, Gleason score less than 8 and PSA less than 15 ng/ml. With that selection, disease-free survival reaches 75 to 80% at 10 years. Recently, dramatic improvement in radiotherapy techniques have been achieved, leading to a better local control by increasing the dose over 70 Gy without additional toxicity. Brachytherapy is also widely used for good prognosis localized disease. Limitant acute urinary side effects have been reported and results seem similar to those reported after prostatectomy or conformal radiotherapy. Recent randomized trials have demonstrated a benefit of early hormonal therapy concurrent with radiotherapy for patients with poor prognosis localized disease. For hormonoresistant metastatic disease, chemotherapy has been used with limited palliative benefit. New drugs are currently evaluated.