Expected and perceived efficacy of complementary and alternative medicine: A comparison views of patients with cancer and oncologists.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: This study sought to identify discrepancies between the expectations of patients with cancer and oncologists regarding the efficacy of complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs), and to determine how patients evaluate CAM efficacy after its use. METHODS: Data from the Cancer Patient Experience Study, a nationwide survey, were used. Seven subdivided efficacy domains were included in the survey. An oncologist-patient matching analysis was done to assess the concordance of CAM efficacies between oncologists and patients with cancer. In addition, the patients' expectations of CAM efficacies were compared before and after use. RESULTS: Out of 719 participants, 201 patients with cancer (28.0%) reported using CAMs. The patients with cancer generally tended to be more positive about CAM efficacies than the oncologists. The largest discrepancy in efficacy perception was found in the efficacy domain of survival benefit, which included complete disease remission and prolonged survival. Many patients reported that they did not experience the positive efficacy they had anticipated before use. However, a substantial proportion of patients indicated that CAMs were as effective as they had expected, even though there is little evidence supporting the CAM efficacies. CONCLUSIONS: There was a marked discrepancy and a lack of concordance in expectations of CAM efficacy between patients with cancer and oncologists. Better communication between the patients and oncologists regarding CAM efficacy would be needed to make the patients to have shared expectations, and to reduce unnecessary CAM use.

A phase II study of docetaxel and oxaliplatin combination in recurrent gastric cancer patients after fluoropyrimidine and/or cisplatin adjuvant treatment: a Korean Cancer Study Group Protocol ST06-02.

BACKGROUND: Surgery alone is no longer an adequate standard of care for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Thus, research efforts should focus on which regimens are the most effective for patients with recurrent gastric cancer after combined treatment with surgery and perioperative or adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed and measurable advanced gastric cancer who showed a relapse even after fluoropyrimidine and/or cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy received docetaxel (35 mg/m(2)) intravenously on day 1 and 8 plus oxaliplatin (100 mg/m(2)) intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients with relapsed advanced gastric cancer who had received adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine and/or cisplatin for a median of 6 months (range, 1-48 months) were enrolled in this trial; 22 (64.7 %) patients had been exposed to both agents. Their median age was 58 years (range, 50-68 years). The overall response rate was 55.9 % (95 % confidence interval (CI), 38.3-73.5 %), including 1 complete response and 18 partial responses. At a median follow-up duration of 28.5 months (range, 9.2-50.7 months), the median progression-free survival for all patients was 5.3 months (95 % CI, 4.4-6.1 months) and the median overall survival was 13.8 months (95 % CI, 11.1-16.4 months). The most common grade 3 or 4 hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were neutropenia (47.1 %) and diarrhea (17.6 %), respectively. Five patients (14.7 %) experienced febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: Docetaxel and oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy was active and tolerable in patients with recurrent gastric cancer after fluoropyrimidine and/or cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy.

Sunitinib-induced hyperammonemic encephalopathy in gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

OBJECTIVE: To report 2 cases of hyperammonemic encephalopathy induced by sunitinib in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). CASE SUMMARY: A 58-year-old man with imatinib-resistant metastatic GIST presented to the emergency department with confusion that developed 17 days after the initiation of sunitinib 50 mg/day. His serum ammonia level was markedly elevated (210 µg/dL). Sunitinib was discontinued, and an enema with lactulose was administered every hour. His neurologic status normalized within 24 hours and his serum ammonia level decreased to 64 µg/dL. A 68-year-old woman with imatinib-resistant metastatic GIST was admitted into the emergency department with confusion and irritability that developed 10 days after the start of sunitinib therapy. Her serum ammonia level was markedly elevated (389 µg/dL). Sunitinib was discontinued, and an enema with lactulose was administered every hour. Within 24 hours, her mental status was improved and her serum ammonia level was decreased to 116 µg/dL. Sunitinib was reintroduced, and the same symptoms occurred after day 7 of administration. Sunitinib was not prescribed afterward and the woman did not experience any further encephalopathic symptoms. DISCUSSION: Sunitinib is a small molecule that inhibits multiple receptor tyrosine kinases such as stem cell factor receptor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet-derived growth factor. It is used as second-line therapy for patients with imatinib-resistant GIST. Hyperammonemic encephalopathy is an uncommon fatal complication of chemotherapy. According to the Naranjo probability scale, sunitinib was a probable cause of hyperammonemic encephalopathy in the patients described here. Although the mechanism of hyperammonemia is unclear, hyperammonemic encephalopathy might be caused by a vascular disorder related to the antiangiogenic properties of sunitinib, and it has ethnic differences associated with genetic polymorphisms. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib may induce hyperammonemic encephalopathy in some patients. Although further studies are warranted, clinicians should be aware of this severe adverse event when using sunitinib for treatment of GIST.