[Acute coronary syndrome after chemotherapy]. / Acuut coronair syndroom na chemotherapie.

Systemic therapy for malignancy may be accompanied by an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), regardless of cardiovascular risk factors. We present three patients with few cardiovascular risk factors and no history of cardiovascular disease, who suffered an ACS within a week of starting systemic treatment of colorectal cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and breast cancer, respectively. In all three patients, systemic anti-cancer therapy was continued after making individualised adjustments to the treatment regimen. It is important to recognize the possible relationship between chemotherapy - including the oral compound capecitabine - and ACS, and to withhold systemic anti-cancer treatment until the ACS is adequately treated. Subsequently, a decision has to be made regarding the continuation of the systemic anti-cancer treatment. Factors to be included in decision making are the intent of the treatment (curative or palliative), the availability of a regimen with less cardiovascular toxicity but comparable efficacy, the outcome of the ACS and the patient's wishes.

Cost effectiveness of primary pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in patients with breast cancer at risk of febrile neutropenia.

PURPOSE: Guidelines advise primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis during chemotherapy if risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) is more than 20%, but this comes with considerable costs. We investigated the incremental costs and effects between two treatment strategies of primary pegfilgrastim prophylaxis. METHODS: Our economic evaluation used a health care perspective and was based on a randomized study in patients with breast cancer with increased risk of FN, comparing primary G-CSF prophylaxis throughout all chemotherapy cycles (G-CSF 1-6 cycles) with prophylaxis during the first two cycles only (G-CSF 1-2 cycles). Primary outcome was cost effectiveness expressed as costs per patient with episodes of FN prevented. RESULTS: The incidence of FN increased from 10% in the G-CSF 1 to 6 cycles study arm (eight of 84 patients) to 36% in the G-CSF 1 to 2 cycles study arm (30 of 83 patients), whereas the mean total costs decreased from € 20,658 (95% CI, € 20,049 to € 21,247) to € 17,168 (95% CI € 16,239 to € 18,029) per patient, respectively. Chemotherapy and G-CSF determined 80% of the total costs. As expected, FN-related costs were higher in the G-CSF 1 to 2 cycles arm. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio for the G-CSF 1 to 6 cycles arm compared with the G-CSF 1 to 2 cycles arm was € 13,112 per patient with episodes of FN prevented. CONCLUSION: We conclude that G-CSF prophylaxis throughout all chemotherapy cycles is more effective, but more costly, compared with prophylaxis limited to the first two cycles. Whether G-CSF prophylaxis throughout all chemotherapy cycles is considered cost effective depends on the willingness to pay per patient with episodes of FN prevented.

Primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis during the first two cycles only or throughout all chemotherapy cycles in patients with breast cancer at risk for febrile neutropenia.

PURPOSE: Early breast cancer is commonly treated with anthracyclines and taxanes. However, combining these drugs increases the risk of myelotoxicity and may require granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support. The highest incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and largest benefit of G-CSF during the first cycles of chemotherapy lead to questions about the effectiveness of continued use of G-CSF throughout later cycles of chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a multicenter study, patients with breast cancer who were considered fit enough to receive 3-weekly polychemotherapy, but also had > 20% risk for FN, were randomly assigned to primary G-CSF prophylaxis during the first two chemotherapy cycles only (experimental arm) or to primary G-CSF prophylaxis throughout all chemotherapy cycles (standard arm). The noninferiority hypothesis was that the incidence of FN would be maximally 7.5% higher in the experimental compared with the standard arm. RESULTS: After inclusion of 167 eligible patients, the independent data monitoring committee advised premature study closure. Of 84 patients randomly assigned to G-CSF throughout all chemotherapy cycles, eight (10%) experienced an episode of FN. In contrast, of 83 patients randomly assigned to G-CSF during the first two cycles only, 30 (36%) had an FN episode (95% CI, 0.13 to 0.54), with a peak incidence of 24% in the third cycle (ie, first cycle without G-CSF prophylaxis). CONCLUSION: In patients with early breast cancer at high risk for FN, continued use of primary G-CSF prophylaxis during all chemotherapy cycles is of clinical relevance and thus cannot be abandoned.

Influence of body mass index on outcome in advanced colorectal cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with or without targeted therapy.

PURPOSE: Obesity is associated with an increased risk of development and recurrence of colorectal cancer. However, the role of obesity in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC) patients is unknown. We investigated the effect of body mass index (BMI) on overall survival (OS) in ACC patients receiving systemic treatment in two large phase III studies (CAIRO and CAIRO2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment data were obtained and analysed from 796 ACC patients who were treated with chemotherapy in the CAIRO study, and from 730 ACC patients who were treated with chemotherapy plus targeted therapy in the CAIRO2 study. Baseline height and weight were used to assign patients to one of the following BMI categories: A (<18.5 kg/m(2)), B (18.5-24.9 kg/m(2)), C (25.0-29.9 kg/m(2)) and D (≥30.0 kg/m(2)). RESULTS: In 796 patients of the CAIRO study a high BMI was associated with better median OS (8.0, 14.9, 18.4 and 19.5 months for BMI categories A, B, C, and D, respectively; P=0.001), and was an independent prognostic factor for OS in a multivariate analysis. BMI was not associated with OS in 730 patients who participated in the CAIRO2 study, although a trend was observed. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that BMI is an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients receiving chemotherapy, but not in patients receiving chemotherapy and targeted therapy. The possible decreased efficacy of bevacizumab in obese patients may explain this discrepant result. The role of BMI in patients receiving targeted therapy should be further tested.

Randomized phase II study comparing efficacy and safety of combination-therapy trastuzumab and docetaxel vs. sequential therapy of trastuzumab followed by docetaxel alone at progression as first-line chemotherapy in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer: HERTAX trial.

BACKGROUND: Because chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is associated with relevant toxicity, sequential monotherapy trastuzumab followed by cytotoxic therapy at disease progression might be an attractive approach. METHODS: In a multicenter phase II trial, 101 patients with overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2(+)) MBC were randomized between combination-therapy trastuzumab (Herceptin) plus docetaxel (H+D) and sequential therapy of single-agent trastuzumab followed at disease progression by docetaxel alone (H→D) as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic disease. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) after completed sequential or combination therapy. RESULTS: For the H+D group the median PFS was 9.4 vs. 9.9 months for the H→D group and 1-year PFS rates were 44% vs. 35%, respectively. However the overall response rates (ORRs) were 79% vs. 53%, respectively (P = .016), and overall survival was 30.5 vs. 19.7 months, respectively (P = .11). In the H→D group, response rates to monotherapy trastuzumab and subsequent docetaxel were 34% and 39%, respectively, with a median PFS during single-agent trastuzumab of 3.9 months. The incidence and severity of neuropathy were significantly higher in the H+D group. Retrospective analysis of trastuzumab treatment beyond progression (applied in 46% of patients in the H+D group and 37% in the H→D group) showed a correlation with longer overall survival in both treatment arms (36.0 vs. 18.0 months and 30.3 vs. 18.6 months, respectively). CONCLUSION: First-line treatment in patients with MBC with H→D resulted in a similar PFS compared with H+D, but the response rate was lower and the overall survival nonsignificantly shorter.