RESUMO
Trials of adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer have shown that aromatase inhibitors have little impact on global health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but have significant effects on patient-reported endocrine symptoms (ESs). There are few studies of HRQoL and psychological distress during preoperative endocrine therapy performed to determine endocrine responsiveness. The NEOS trial is a multicenter, phase 3 randomized controlled trial in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. The primary aim of the trial was to evaluate the need for adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with clinical T1c-T2N0M0, hormone receptor-positive tumors who responded to neoadjuvant letrozole (LET) administered for 24-28 weeks before surgery. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival and the secondary endpoints included adverse events, HRQoL, and cost-effectiveness. In a HRQoL sub-study, subjects were assessed at baseline and 4 and 16 weeks after starting neoadjuvant LET, using the functional assessment of cancer therapy-breast and its ES subscale, and the hospital anxiety and depression scale. HRQoL and psychosocial distress were analyzed in the uncontrolled phase during 24-28 weeks of neoadjuvant LET therapy in the NEOS trial. From May 16, 2008, to December 14, 2011, 503 patients were recruited into the HRQoL sub-study. The full analysis set included 497 patients with a mean age of 63-years old. The questionnaire response rates at enrollment and 4 and 16 weeks were 94.4, 90.7, and 89.1 %, respectively. There were no significant changes in the FACT-G or B-trial outcome index over time, but the social and family well-being score and the ES subscale deteriorated significantly, and the number of patients with clinically significant hot flush increased significantly. Anxiety, depression, and emotional well-being improved significantly after neoadjuvant LET. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy with LET had no impact on global HRQoL, but did influence endocrine-related symptoms such as hot flush. This study is registered as UMIN000001090.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos Hormonais/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias da Mama/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias da Mama/psicologia , Terapia Neoadjuvante , Nitrilas/uso terapêutico , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Triazóis/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Letrozol , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Terapia Neoadjuvante/métodos , Pós-Menopausa , Estresse Psicológico , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS), S-1 alone and gemcitabine alone as first-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer in the GEST (Gemcitabine and TS-1 Trial) study and to assess the impacts of adverse events and tumour response on HRQOL. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine alone (1000 mg/m2 weekly for 3 of 4 weeks), S-1 alone (80, 100 or 120 mg/day twice daily for 4 of 6 weeks) or GS (gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m2 weekly plus S-1 at 60, 80 or 100 mg/day twice daily for 2 of 3 weeks). HRQOL was assessed using the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire at baseline and weeks 6, 12, 24, 48 and 72. EQ-5D scores, quality-adjusted life months (QALMs), quality-adjusted progression-free months (QAPFMs) and time until definitive HRQOL deterioration (TUDD) were compared among the three groups. The impacts of adverse events and tumour response on EQ-5D scores were analysed. RESULTS: Including EQ-5D scores after death as 0, the mean profile was significantly better in the GS than gemcitabine group (difference, 0.069; p=0.003), but not the S-1 group (difference, -0.011; p=0.613). The mean profiles until death were similar in the three groups. QALMs, QAPFMs and TUDD were significantly longer in the GS than gemcitabine group (p<0.001, p<0.001 and p=0.004, respectively), but not the S-1 group (p=0.563, p=0.741 and p=0.701, respectively). Fatigue, anorexia and tumour response were significantly associated with changes in EQ-5D scores. CONCLUSIONS: GS achieved better HRQOL than gemcitabine alone, resulting a good balance between overall survival and HRQOL benefits. S-1 alone provides HRQOL similar to that provided by gemcitabine alone. Preventing fatigue and anorexia and maintaining better response would improve HRQOL.