Evaluation of a novel skin care product for the management of chemotherapy-related dermatologic toxicities: A quasi-experimental study.

PURPOSE: Evaluate the efficacy of a novel skincare product for the management of chemotherapy-related dermatological toxicities. METHODS: A monocentric, prospective, interventional, open-label, pretest-posttest, single-group study with cancer patients receiving chemotherapy (n = 100) was set up. All enrolled patients applied the emollient daily to their face and body for three weeks. The severity of the skin reactions was evaluated by a researcher using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0 at baseline and end of the trial. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included the frequency and severity of skin symptoms (Numerical rating scale, NRS), quality of life (QoL; Skindex-16 and Dermatology Life Quality Index), Patient Benefit Index (PBI), and treatment satisfaction. PROs were collected at baseline, weekly, and at the end of the trial. RESULTS: According to the CTCAE and NRS, the novel emollient significantly improved the severity and frequency of xerosis and pruritus (Ps ≤ .001). A significant reduction in the NRS score for frequency of erythema was measured (p < .001). The frequency and severity of burning and pain did not change. Regarding the patients' QoL, no beneficial effect of the skin care product was measurable. 44% of the patients experienced at least one patient-relevant treatment benefit. 87% of the patients were satisfied with the emollient and would recommend it. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the novel emollient significantly reduced chemotherapy-induced skin toxicity, more specifically xerosis and pruritus without hampering patient's QoL. Future research is needed to make definite conclusions using a study design including a control group and a long-term follow-up.

Study protocol of KLIMOP: a cohort study on the wellbeing of older cancer patients in Belgium and the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is mainly a disease of older patients. In older cancer patients, additional endpoints such as quality of survival and daily functioning might be considered equally relevant as overall or disease free survival. However, these factors have been understudied using prospective designs focussing on older cancer patients. Therefore, this study will focus on the impact of cancer, ageing, and their interaction on the long-term wellbeing of older cancer patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is an observational cohort study. We aim to recruit 720 cancer patients above 70 years with a new diagnosis of breast, prostate, lung or gastrointestinal cancer and two control groups: one control group of 720 patients above 70 years without a previous diagnosis of cancer and one control group of 720 cancer patients between 50 - 69 years newly diagnosed with breast, prostate, lung or gastrointestinal cancer. Data collection will take place at inclusion, after six months, after one year and every subsequent year until death or end of the study. Data will be collected through personal interviews (consisting of socio-demographic information, general health information, a comprehensive geriatric assessment, quality of life, health locus of control and a loneliness scale), a handgrip test, assessment of medical records, two buccal swabs and a blood sample from cancer patients (at baseline). As an annex study, caregivers of the participants will be recruited as well. Data collection for caregivers will consist of a self-administered questionnaire examining depression, coping, and burden. DISCUSSION: This extensive data collection will increase insight on how wellbeing of older cancer patients is affected by cancer (diagnosis and treatment), ageing, and their interaction. Results may provide new insights, which might contribute to the improvement of care for older cancer patients.

Impact of solid cancer on in-hospital mortality overall and among different subgroups of patients with COVID-19: a nationwide, population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer seems to have an independent adverse prognostic effect on COVID-19-related mortality, but uncertainty exists regarding its effect across different patient subgroups. We report a population-based analysis of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 with prior or current solid cancer versus those without cancer. METHODS: We analysed data of adult patients registered until 24 May 2020 in the Belgian nationwide database of Sciensano. The primary objective was in-hospital mortality within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis among patients with solid cancer versus patients without cancer. Severe event occurrence, a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive ventilation and/or death, was a secondary objective. These endpoints were analysed across different patient subgroups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyse the association between cancer and clinical characteristics (baseline analysis) and the effect of cancer on in-hospital mortality and on severe event occurrence, adjusting for clinical characteristics (in-hospital analysis). RESULTS: A total of 13 594 patients (of whom 1187 with solid cancer (8.7%)) were evaluable for the baseline analysis and 10 486 (892 with solid cancer (8.5%)) for the in-hospital analysis. Patients with cancer were older and presented with less symptoms/signs and lung imaging alterations. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with solid cancer compared with patients without cancer (31.7% vs 20.0%, respectively; adjusted OR (aOR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58). The aOR was 3.84 (95% CI 1.94 to 7.59) among younger patients (<60 years) and 2.27 (95% CI 1.41 to 3.64) among patients without other comorbidities. Severe event occurrence was similar in both groups (36.7% vs 28.8%; aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29). CONCLUSIONS: This population-based analysis demonstrates that solid cancer is an independent adverse prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. This adverse effect was more pronounced among younger patients and those without other comorbidities. Patients with solid cancer should be prioritised in vaccination campaigns and in tailored containment measurements.

Which Factors Predict Overall Survival in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated With Abiraterone Acetate Post-Docetaxel?

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate (AA) increases overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with docetaxel. However, survival time varies substantially between individuals. Our goal was to identify prognostic factors that better estimate OS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentric analysis of 368 patients with mCRPC starting AA with prednisone after docetaxel. Cox proportional hazards statistics were applied. A multivariate model was constructed based on significant univariate predictors by using a manual stepwise forward and backward selection strategy. Model performance was determined by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: Univariate analysis identified 20 significant OS predictors. A multivariate model was constructed, based on 220 patients, incorporating 5 independent risk factors for decreased OS at the time of AA initiation: hemoglobin < 12 g/dL (hazard ratio [HR] 2.02), > 10 metastases (HR 1.80), ECOG performance status ≥ 2 (HR 1.88), radiographic progression (HR 1.50), and time since diagnosis < 90 months (HR 1.66, all P < .05). Patients were stratified into 3 groups: good (0-2 risk factors, median OS 22.6 months), intermediate (3 risk factors, median OS 13.9 months), and poor prognosis (4-5 risk factors, median OS 6.2 months). The area under the ROC curve based on the event "death by the time of median OS (13.3 months)" was 0.736 (95% confidence interval 0.670-0.803). CONCLUSION: We identified 5 readily available risk factors independently associated with decreased OS. The resulting model may be used for patient counseling in daily clinical practice, as well as patient stratification in clinical trials.

Abiraterone acetate post-docetaxel for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the Belgian compassionate use program.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate (AA) is licensed for treating metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Real-world data on oncological outcome after AA are scarce. The current study assesses efficacy and safety of AA in mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel who started treatment during the Belgian compassionate use program (January 2011-July 2012). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records from 368 patients with mCRPC from 23 different Belgian hospitals who started AA 1000mg per day with 10mg prednisone or equivalent were retrospectively reviewed (September 2013-December 2014). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (decrease≥50%), time to PSA progression (increase>50% over PSA nadir in case of PSA response/>25% in absence of PSA response), time to radiographic progression (on bone scans or for soft tissue lesions using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors 1.1), overall survival and adverse event rate (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03) were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier statistics were applied. RESULTS: Overall, 92 patients (25%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status≥2. Median age was 73 years, median PSA was 103ng/dl. PSA response was observed in 131 patients (37.4%). Median time to PSA and radiographic progression was 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.6-4.6) and 5.8 months (5.3-6.4), respectively. Median overall survival was 15.1 months (13.6-16.6). Most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events were anemia (13.9%), hypokalemia (7.3%), fatigue (6.8%), and pain (6.3%). Median duration of AA treatment was 5.3 months (interquartile range: 2.8-10.3). The main study limitation is its retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: These real-world data on post-docetaxel AA efficacy are in line with the COU-AA-301 trial. Importantly, incidence of severe anemia and hypokalemia is up to 50% higher than reported in previous studies.