ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Capecitabine is important in breast cancer treatment but causes diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome (HFS), affecting adherence and quality of life. We sought to identify pharmacogenomic predictors of capecitabine toxicity using a novel monitoring tool. METHODS: Patients with metastatic breast cancer were prospectively treated with capecitabine (2000 mg/m2/day, 14 days on/7 off). Patients completed in-person toxicity questionnaires (day 1/cycle) and automated phone-in assessments (days 8, 15). Correlation of genotypes with early and overall toxicity was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-nine patients were enrolled (14 institutions). Diarrhea and HFS occurred in 52% (17% grade 3) and 69% (9% grade 3), respectively. Only 29% of patients completed four cycles without dose reduction/interruption. In 39%, the highest toxicity grade was captured via phone. Three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with diarrhea-DPYD*5 (odds ratio [OR] 4.9; P = 0.0005), a MTHFR missense SNP (OR 3.3; P = 0.02), and a SNP upstream of MTRR (OR 3.0; P = 0.03). GWAS elucidated a novel HFS SNP (OR 3.0; P = 0.0007) near TNFSF4 (OX40L), a gene implicated in autoimmunity including autoimmune skin diseases never before implicated in HFS. Genotype-gene expression analyses of skin tissues identified rs11158568 (associated with HFS via GWAS) with expression of CHURC1, a transcriptional activator controlling fibroblast growth factor (beta = - 0.74; P = 1.46 × 10-23), representing a previously unidentified mechanism for HFS. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first cancer pharmacogenomic study to use phone-in self-reporting, permitting augmented toxicity characterization. Three germline toxicity SNPs were replicated, and several novel SNPs/genes having strong functional relevance were discovered. If further validated, these markers could permit personalized capecitabine dosing.
Subject(s)
Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic/adverse effects , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Capecitabine/adverse effects , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/etiology , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/genetics , Female , Ferredoxin-NADP Reductase/genetics , Follow-Up Studies , Genotype , Germ-Line Mutation , Humans , Methylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase (NADPH2)/genetics , Middle Aged , Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Glucocorticoid receptor (GR) overexpression is associated with poor prognosis ER-negative breast cancer. GR antagonism with mifepristone increases chemotherapy-induced breast cancer cell death, therefore we conducted a phase I clinical trial of mifepristone and nab-paclitaxel in advanced breast cancer. METHODS: A novel randomized phase I design was used to assess the effect of mifepristone on nab-paclitaxel pharmacokinetics and toxicity. Patients were randomized to placebo or mifepristone for the first cycle; mifepristone was given to all for subsequent cycles. RESULTS: Nine patients were enrolled. All were found to have a twofold or greater increase in serum cortisol after mifepristone administration, reflecting effective GR inhibition. Neutropenia occurred at both nab-paclitaxel dose levels studied (100 and 80 mg/m(2)), and was easily managed with dose reduction and/or growth factor administration. Pharmacokinetic data suggest an interaction between nab-paclitaxel and mifepristone in some patients. Two patients had complete responses (CR), three partial responses (PR), one stable disease (SD), and three progressive disease (PD). Immunohistochemical staining for GR found six of nine tumors were GR-positive. All six GR-positive tumors were triple-negative at the time of recurrence. Of these six patients, two had CRs, two PRs, one SD, and one PD. CONCLUSIONS: GR appears to be a promising target in TNBC, and GR inhibition plus chemotherapy produces manageable toxicity. While neutropenia was observed in some, a nab-paclitaxel dose of 100 mg/m(2) plus mifepristone 300 mg was found to be tolerable, and a randomized phase II trial of nab-paclitaxel with/without mifepristone is planned in GR-positive advanced TNBC.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The LIFE Cancer Survivorship Program at NorthShore University HealthSystem provides risk-adapted visits (RAV) facilitated by an oncology nurse during which a survivorship care plan (SCP) is provided and discussed. In this report, we describe and evaluate RAV in promoting individualized health care and self-management during survivorship transition. METHODS: Patients complete a post-RAV questionnaire at their RAV and another ≥1 year after their RAV. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred thirteen (1713) RAVs, majority for breast cancer, occurred from January 2007 to March 2014. One thousand six hundred fifteen (1615) "day-of" post-RAV questionnaires were completed. Respondents scaled statements as strongly agree/agree/disagree/strongly disagree. Combined strongly agree/agree ratings are 94 % felt more confident in communicating information about their treatments to other health care providers, 90 % felt more comfortable recognizing signs/symptoms to report to providers, and 98 % had a better appreciation for community programs/services. Of 488 respondents (RAV January 2007 to December 2012 n = 1366) to a questionnaire at least 1 year after the RAV, nearly 100 % found SCP useful to summarize medical information, 97 % to reinforce follow-up, 85 % to recognize symptoms of recurrence, 93 % to identify healthy lifestyle practices, 91 % to assist in identifying resources for support, 72 % discussed their SCP with their healthcare provider, and 97 % made at least one positive lifestyle change. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in LIFE RAV following treatment helps survivors to guide future self-care behavior. Data suggest that benefits may persist 1 year after the visit and support the feasibility of a nurse-led RAV to establish a SCP in cancer survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Combined provision and discussion of SCPs help survivors construct a useful understanding of their cancer experience and may promote long-term self-management.
Subject(s)
Health Promotion , Neoplasms/therapy , Patient Care Planning , Patient Education as Topic , Patient-Centered Care , Self Care , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Ambulatory Care , Continuity of Patient Care , Female , Health Promotion/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/nursing , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , Survivors/statistics & numerical data , Transitional Care , Young AdultABSTRACT
Magnitude differences in scores on a measure of quality of life that correspond to differences in function or clinical course are called clinically important differences (CIDs). Anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to provide ranges of CIDs for five targeted scale scores of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An) questionnaire. Three samples of cancer patients were used: Sample 1 included 50 patients participating in a validation study of the FACT-An; Sample 2 included 131 patients participating in a longitudinal study of chemotherapy-induced fatigue; sample 3 included 2,402 patients enrolled in a community-based clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness and safety of a treatment for anemia. Three clinical indicators (hemoglobin level; performance status; response to treatment) were used to determine anchor-based differences. One-half of the standard deviation and 1 standard error of measurement were used as distribution-based criteria. Analyses supported the following whole number estimates of a minimal CID for these five targeted scores: Fatigue Scale = 3.0; FACT-G total score = 4.0; FACT-An total score = 7.0; Trial Outcome Index-Fatigue = 5.0; and Trial Outcome Index-Anemia = 6.0. These estimates provide a basis for sample size estimation when planning for a clinical trial or other longitudinal study, when the purpose is to ensure detection of meaningful change over time. They can also be used in conjunction with more traditional clinical markers to assist investigators in determining treatment efficacy.