ABSTRACT
The therapeutic arsenal for advanced ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer has been enriched by specific treatments targeting this molecular abnormality, with five molecules available, including lorlatinib, approved since July 2020. This treatment can have side effects common to other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, as well as other less common disorders affecting the central nervous system such as impaired cognitive function, speech or mood. The prevalence of neuro-psychiatric effects under treatment with lorlatinib reported in studies is nearly 40 % with a mild to moderate intensity in most cases. Given the potential impact on patients' quality of life and even on compliance with treatment, it is essential to include their detection during consultations. The main problem is still to have simple screening tools adapted to clinical practice. A multidisciplinary expert panel (pulmonologist, medical oncologist, psychiatrist, neurologist, pharmacist, nurse) therefore met to propose, based on data from the literature and their clinical experience, elements of management in order to detect these cognitive disorders at an early stage and optimize treatment tolerance. The subjects discussed concern screening and assessment tools, the management of side effects, and their prevention. The use of the practical elements proposed by the group could help optimize the identification and management of central nervous system disorders occurring on lorlatinib.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Central Nervous System Diseases , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Lung Neoplasms , Aminopyridines/therapeutic use , Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Humans , Lactams , Lactams, Macrocyclic/adverse effects , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Pyrazoles , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
Advances in early detection and treatment have pushed in a few decades the management of cancers from a management model of the end of life to the management of a chronic disease. This evolution has accelerated the development of supportive care in two directions, firstly towards the best possible support to the end of life in advanced cancer patients (palliative care) and secondly to the limitation of treatment toxicities, the prevention of relapse and the return to life as "normal" as possible (care for after cancer). If palliative care now has a legitimacy and a solid regulatory base, this is not yet the case of supportive care in France. The content and organization differ depending on the institution, the choice of clinicians and patient preferences. Social networks and media convey messages that blur evidence-based practices. This article aims to review the facilitators and obstacles of this perspective.