Health-related quality of life and psychological distress during neoadjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole to determine endocrine responsiveness in postmenopausal breast cancer.

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.

Health-related quality of life in a randomised phase III study of gemcitabine plus S-1, S-1 alone and gemcitabine alone for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: GEST study.

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.