RESUMO
Background: Data related to adverse drug reactions (ADRs), specifically immune-related adverse events (irAEs), in long-term treatment with immunotherapy in real-world practice is scarce, as is general information regarding the management of ADRs. Objectives: To characterize and describe the incidence of ADRs in patients who began immunotherapy treatment in clinical practice. Methods: In a prospective observational study cancer patients ≥18 years of age who were treated with a monotherapy regime of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were evaluated. The study period was from November 2017 to June 2019 and patients were followed up until June 2021. Patients were contacted monthly by telephone and their electronic health records were reviewed. Each ADR was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE 5.0). Results: Out of 99 patients, 86 met the inclusion criteria. Most were male (67.4%), with a median age of 66 (interquartile range, IQR: 59-76). The most frequent cancer was non-small cellular lung cancer (46 cases, 53.5%), followed by melanoma (22, 25.6%). A total of 74 patients (86%) were treated with anti-PD-1 drugs and 12 (14%) were treated with anti-PD-L1 drugs. The median treatment durations were 4.9 (IQR: 1.9-17.0) and 5.9 months (IQR: 1.2-12.3), respectively. Sixty-three patients (73%) developed from a total of 156 (44% of the total number of ADR) irADRs, wherein the most frequent were skin disorders (50 cases, 32%, incidence = 30.5 irADRs/100 patients per year [p-y]), gastrointestinal disorders (29, 19%, 17.7 irADRs/100 p-y), musculoskeletal disorders (17, 11%, 10.4 irADRs/100 p-y), and endocrine disorders (14, 9%, 8.6 irADRs/100 p-y). A total of 22 irADRs (14%) had a latency period of ≥12 months. Twelve irADRs (7.7%) were categorized as grade 3-4, and while 2 (1.3%) were categorized as grade 5 (death). Sixty-one irADRs (39.1%) in 36 patients required pharmacological treatment and 47 irADRs (30.1%) in 22 patients required treatment with corticosteriods. Conclusion: The majority of patients treated with anti-PD1/PDL1-based immunotherapy experienced adverse reactions. Although most of these reactions were mild, 11.5% were categorized as grade 3 or above. A high percentage of the reactions were immune-related and occurred throughout the treatment, thereby indicating that early identification and close monitoring is essential.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: This phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of vinorelbine in combination with estramustine in patients with chemotherapy-naïve hormone-refractory prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients received vinorelbine (i.v. 25 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks and estramustine (oral, 600 mg/m2) daily. Eligible patients were required to have progressive metastatic disease following the first hormonal manipulation. RESULTS: Of the 51 patients enrolled (median age = 69 years), 84% presented bone involvement and 75% had at least two organs involved at the time of study entry and 47 were evaluable for treatment efficacy. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) response (> or =50% decrease) which was the primary efficacy criterion was reported in 21 patients (41.2%) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and in 20 patients (48.8%) in the per protocol (PP) population. Of the 7 patients with measurable disease, 2 achieved partial response. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.7 months (range: 1.9-8.6) and 14.3 months (range: 4.2-21.2), respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was reported in 6.1% of patients and in 1% of cycles. The incidence of complicated neutropenia (febrile neutropenia reported in 1 patient and septic shock with severe neutropenia reported in 2 patients) was 5.8%. The most frequent grade 3-4 non-haematological events (% of patients > or =5%) included anorexia (10%), thrombosis/embolism (8%), vomiting and hypotension (6% each). There were 3 toxic deaths (5.9 %) resulting from pulmonary embolism, angina pectoris, and septic shock. The impact of combined chemotherapy on the quality-of-life (QL) of the patients was assessed between baseline and the first evaluation scheduled at 6 weeks indicated a marked reduction in pain while the rest of the symptoms remained stable. Overall, health status improved slightly over the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that the combination of vinorelbine and estramustine is an active regimen in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer who had not been treated previously with chemotherapy. Main toxicities included complicated neutropenia even though the incidence of severe neutropenia was low. We observed a higher incidence of toxic deaths which could have been related to the regimen of estramustine used in the study.
