Delayed care for patients with newly diagnosed cancer due to COVID-19 and estimated impact on cancer mortality in France.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wave on cancer patient management was measured within the nationwide network of the Unicancer comprehensive cancer centers in France. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The number of patients diagnosed and treated within 17 of the 18 Unicancer centers was collected in 2020 and compared with that during the same periods between 2016 and 2019. Unicancer centers treat close to 20% of cancer patients in France yearly. The reduction in the number of patients attending the Unicancer centers was analyzed per regions and cancer types. The impact of delayed care on cancer-related deaths was calculated based on different hypotheses. RESULTS: A 6.8% decrease in patients managed within Unicancer in the first 7 months of 2020 versus 2019 was observed. This reduction reached 21% during April and May, and was not compensated in June and July, nor later until November 2020. This reduction was observed only for newly diagnosed patients, while the clinical activity for previously diagnosed patients increased by 4% similar to previous years. The reduction was more pronounced in women, in breast and prostate cancers, and for patients without metastasis. Using an estimated hazard ratio of 1.06 per month of delay in diagnosis and treatment of new patients, we calculated that the delays observed in the 5-month period from March to July 2020 may result in an excess mortality due to cancer of 1000-6000 patients in coming years. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the delays in cancer patient management were observed only for newly diagnosed patients, more frequently in women, for breast cancer, prostate cancer, and nonmetastatic cancers. These delays may result is an excess risk of cancer-related deaths in the coming years.

Is oral chemotherapy prescription safe for patients? A cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Oral chemotherapies are increasingly prescribed. Yet wide variations in prescription practices and in monitoring of toxicity have been underlined despite existing guidelines. There is little recent information available as regard to these practices. We aimed to obtain exhaustive information on oral chemotherapy prescription practices and safety monitoring in French hospitals. METHODS: A cross-sectional multicentre survey was carried out to collect information on drug prescription, administration and surveillance: prescribing practices, coordination and monitoring of adherence, safety monitoring and side-effects occurrence prevention. Participants were a large sample of the French oncologists prescribing oral chemotherapy (20%). RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-seven oncologists from 112 hospitals (public, comprehensive cancer centres and private) replied (23.7% of cancer hospitals). The majority (56.1%) of the prescriptions were hand-written on a blank sheet. Eighty-four physicians (53.5%) included dose information and 36 (23%) declared having no monitoring procedures for adherence. Only 84 responders (54%) provided education material at first prescription of oral chemotherapy in way to limit avoidable side-effects. Sixty-one (39%) responders stated that they recalled at least one serious adverse event in the previous year declared in their centre. CONCLUSIONS: In this 2012 study, the majority of prescribers followed no standards in prescription writing, safety monitoring and toxicity prevention. The implementation of the international recommendations for oral chemotherapy administration should be considered as a top priority-for both prescribers and health authorities-as regards to the dynamic of development of these molecules and their potential side-effects.

Multicenter phase II study of bimonthly high-dose leucovorin, fluorouracil infusion, and oxaliplatin for metastatic colorectal cancer resistant to the same leucovorin and fluorouracil regimen.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the objective tumor response rates and toxicities of leucovorin (LV) plus fluorouracil (5-FU) cancer regimen combined with oxaliplatin (85 mg/m(2)) every 2 weeks on metastatic colorectal cancer patients with documented proof of progression while on bimonthly LV and 5-FU alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred patients were enrolled onto this study and 97 received the study drugs between October 1995 and December 1996. Eighty-nine patients were eligible for per-protocol efficacy analysis with documented proof of progression on one of the following two treatments: LV 500 mg/m(2) and continuous 5-FU infusion 1.5 to 2 g/m(2)/22 hours, days 1 through 2 every 2 weeks (FOLFUHD); or LV 200 mg/m(2), bolus 5-FU 400 mg/m(2), and continuous 5-FU infusion 600 mg/m(2)/22 hours, days 1 through 2 every 2 weeks (LV5FU2). In our study, 40 patients received FOLFUHD + 85 mg/m(2) of oxaliplatin day 1 (FOLFOX3) and 57 patients received LV5FU2 + 85 mg/m(2) of oxaliplatin day 1 (FOLFOX4). RESULTS: Of the 97 patients treated, 20 partial responses were observed (FOLFOX3/4: response rate, 20.6%; 95% confidence interval, 13% to 31.1%; FOLFOX3: response rate,18.4%; FOLFOX4: response rate, 23.5%). For patients treated with FOLFOX3/4, the median response duration for was 7.5 months, and the major toxicities were peripheral neuropathy and neutropenia. The incidence of grade 3 (National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria) peripheral neuropathy was 20.6%; whereas the overall incidence of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia was 27.8%, 15%, and 36.9% for FOLFOX3/4, FOLFOX3, and FOLFOX4, respectively (P =.02). From the start of treatment, median progression-free survival was 4. 7, 4.6, and 5.1 months for FOLFOX3/4, FOLFOX3, FOLFOX4, respectively, and median overall survival was 10.8, 10.6, and 11.1 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: This phase II study of oxaliplatin at 85 mg/m(2) in combination with bimonthly LV plus 5-FU in patients with colorectal cancer resistant to LV plus 5-FU alone confirms the enhanced antitumor activity of oxaliplatin in combination with 5-FU.

Phase II study of irinotecan in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer in chemotherapy-naive patients and patients pretreated with fluorouracil-based chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of irinotecan (CPT-11) in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer in both chemotherapy-naive and pretreated patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred thirteen patients (aged 18 to 75 years) with metastatic colorectal cancer, World Health Organization (WHO) performance status < or = 2, and life expectancy > or = 3 months were treated with CPT-11 350 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. All 178 patients eligible for efficacy analysis had not received more than one prior fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy regimen (adjuvant or palliative) and had adequate hematologic, renal, and hepatic function. RESULTS: Primary tumor sites were the colon (71%) and rectum (28%). Sixty-six percent of the patients had > or = two metastatic sites. Ninety-eight percent of the patients had undergone previous surgery, and 77.5% had received prior chemotherapy. Thirty-two of 178 eligible patients achieved on objective response (four complete responses [CRs] and 28 partial responses [PRs]; response rate, 18%; 95% confidence interval, 12.6% to 24.4%), 65 were stable, and 59 progressed. The response rate was 17.7% in the pretreated group and 18.8% in the chemotherapy-naive group. Within the former subgroup, response rates of 16.1% were reported in patients who were progressive on prior 5-FU chemotherapy and 19.1% in patients who were progressive off such treatment. The median duration of objective response (9.1 months) and median time to achievement of a response (9.3 weeks) did not differ between chemotherapy-naive and pretreated patients. The most frequent adverse events were neutropenia, which developed in 80% of the patients, delayed diarrhea (87%), alopecia (88%), fatigue (81%), and nausea/vomiting (77%). All these adverse events were manageable. Severe (WHO grade 3 or 4) neutropenia was only observed in 18% of the cycles, leukopenia in 11%, delayed diarrhea in 11%, and nausea and vomiting in 3%. Development of simultaneous grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and delayed diarrhea during 4% of the cycles was the safety issue of greatest concern. CONCLUSION: CPT-11 has definite activity in the treatment of advanced metastatic colorectal cancer both in chemotherapy-naive and in pretreated patients who experienced disease progression on 5-FU, which suggests a lack of cross-resistance between CPT-11 and 5-FU. Diarrhea and neutropenia, the major toxicities of CPT-11, contribute to the risk to develop febrile neutropenic sepsis.

Quality of final care for terminal cancer patients in a comprehensive cancer centre from the point of view of patients' families.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of care for terminal cancer patients at our institution, as assessed by families in a questionnaire sent 6 months after the death of the patient. We evaluated the quality of information given to the patients and to their families, the patients' "comfort" at the end of their lives (nursing, pain, psychological support) and the families' opinions about the practical conditions at the time of death (in our institution or at home). A total of 105 consecutive patients who died in our institution between January and June 1989 were included in the study; the vast majority had breast or head and neck cancers. We obtained a total of 48 answers from the 105 families that received the questionnaire. Of these, 87.5% were satisfied with the terminal nursing care, 77% were satisfied with the information given to patients and 60% with the information given to families. The treatment for pain was considered to be inefficient or incomplete by 21% of the families; 32 families (67%) considered that the death of terminal cancer patients should occur in the hospital where the patient had been treated and 12% felt that it should occur at home. This study led us to examine various means for improving the quality of care for our terminal cancer patients.

Lenograstim prevents morbidity from intensive induction chemotherapy in the treatment of inflammatory breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rHuG-CSF) versus its inert vehicle in patients with unilateral nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer treated with fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide high-dose (FEC-HD) neoadjuvant chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty patients have been enrolled by nine French centers in this double-blind, parallel-group, vehicle-controlled study to compare at each cycle subcutaneous lenograstim (5 micrograms/kg/d) with placebo given from day 6 to day 15 after the induction chemotherapy (day 1 to day 4, fluorouracil 750 mg/m2 continuous intravenous [IV] infusion; day 2 to day 4, epirubicin 35 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 400 mg/m2 both IV push). Four cycles were planned every 3 weeks before locoregional treatment. Patients with febrile neutropenia remained blinded for the subsequent cycles. RESULTS: Lenograstim significantly reduced the duration of neutropenia at less than 0.5 x 10(9)/L and less than 1 x 10(9)/L to a median duration of 2 and 3 days, respectively, as compared with 5 and 7 days in the placebo group. This translated into a statistically significant reduced incidence of microbiologically documented infections, and a decreased need for rehospitalizations for infectious events and antibiotic use. Clinical objective tumor response rate observed after four cycles was 89.6% and 93%, respectively, in the placebo and treated groups. Mild transient bone and injection-site pain, myelemia, and hyperleukocytosis were the most frequently reported adverse events associated with lenograstim. CONCLUSION: Lenograstim is safe and effective to reduce morbidity associated with FEC-HD neoadjuvant chemotherapy in inflammatory breast cancer. Response rate is not affected.