Induction Therapy With Cisplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Paclitaxel in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the toxicities and response rate of a modified TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil) protocol in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer (ECOG performance status ≤1). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Induction treatment consisted of cisplatin 25 mg/m2/day as a 90 min infusion for three consecutive days, leucovorin 20 mg/m2/day as a bolus for four consecutive days, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 370 mg/m2/day as a bolus for four consecutive days, and paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 as a 1-h infusion on Days 1, 8, and 15, repeated every 3-4 weeks (twelve cycles to 6 patients). RESULTS: The main toxicities were grade 1 neuropathy, mucositis, and fatigue. There were four episodes of severe toxicities (grade ≥3). There was one early death, and 2 patients were discontinued due to hematological toxicity. Other side effects included neutropenia, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. CONCLUSION: Induction therapy with cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and paclitaxel in head and neck cancer is not feasible because of severe toxicity.

Medical Students' Perception of Risk Factors for Cancer.

To evaluate the perception of risk factors for cancer among medical students and how it varies among students in different years of their medical education. Cross-sectional study was conducted in 2019. The American Institute for Cancer Research Cancer Risk Awareness Survey questionnaire was administered to medical students at the Centro Universitário Saúde ABC. Students were divided into those in their 1st to 3rd year and those in their 4th to 6th year of medical education. Qualitative variables were described by frequency and percentage, and quantitative variables were described by mean and standard deviation or median and interquartile range. The scores of the groups on the questionnaire were compared using Student's t test. The 95% confidence interval was calculated, and p values < 0.05 were considered significant. We included 196 students, with approximately 30 to 35 students in each year of medical education. The median age was 22 (18 to 31), with 74% being female. Among risk factors for cancer, smoking (100%), cancer-causing genes (99.48%), and excessive sunlight exposure (99.48%) were the most cited by students. We observed a significant difference in the number of correct answers, favoring students in their 4th to the 6th year over those in their 1st to the 3rd year (mean = 16.46 vs. mean = 13.73, p < 0.001). Perception about risk factors for cancer is greater in the later years of medical education.

The efficacy of placebo for the treatment of cancer-related fatigue: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a common symptom among patients with cancer. The efficacy of placebo, however, was never the main objective of any meta-analysis. Predicting the efficacy of placebo may facilitate researchers in designing future clinical trials for the treatment of CRF. METHODS: We performed a systematic review searching for prospective clinical trials comparing any treatment versus placebo for the treatment of CRF. We included studies that enrolled patients with any primary site of neoplasia and any stage of cancer. We excluded all studies that assessed fatigue related to any treatment. The primary endpoint of this study is the mean effect of placebo on fatigue according to the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness (FACIT-F) and Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) scales. The secondary endpoint was the proportion of patients who reported improvement in fatigue (response rate). RESULTS: We found 520 studies, and 29 studies with 3758 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Placebo had a mean effect of + 4.88 (95%CI + 2.45 to + 7.29) using the FACIT-F scale, although it was statistically worse than the interventions studied (p = 0.005). Using the BFI scale, placebo had an average effect of + 0.64 (95%CI + 0.02 to + 1.30), although it was also worse than the other interventions studied (p = 0.002). In terms of the response rate, 29% (95%CI 25-32%) of patients taking a placebo reported a significant improvement in CRF compared with 36% of patients treated with other interventions (p = 0.030). CONCLUSIONS: Placebo treatments had a significant effect on CRF, and predicting these effects may help design future studies for CRF.

Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Metastatic and/or Unresectable Gastric Cancer in Brazil.

PURPOSE: In Brazil, patients with gastric cancer have not been systematically followed-up and evaluated, thus data regarding patterns of care and outcomes are scarce or missing. The objective of this study was to evaluate patterns of care of advanced gastric cancer in standard practice in Brazil. METHODS: This was an observational, multicenter, retrospective study, which included patients with metastatic and/or unresectable gastric cancer (MGC) who underwent at least one line of treatment. RESULTS: We analyzed data on 155 patients diagnosed with MGC, most are men (57.4%), with mean age of 61.9 years at diagnosis, with 99 (63.9%) from the public healthcare system and 56 (36.1%) from the private setting. Platinum- and/or fluoropyrimidine-containing regimens prevailed as first-line therapy, while irinotecan was the most used regimen in the second and in the third lines. More than 40% of patients underwent only one line of systemic therapy, of which around 40% either died during the treatment or went on to best supportive care (BSC) only. The remaining patients received further treatment lines. A fifth of the patients in the study died within two months after discontinuation of the first-line treatment. Adverse events, use of concomitant medications, support procedures, outpatient visits, and hospitalizations were reported for most patients, especially in the first and second lines of treatment and during exclusive BSC. CONCLUSIONS: Survival during or after the first-line chemotherapy remains poor among patients with MGC. Adverse events and health resource use were common in the first and second lines of treatment and in exclusive BSC. These results suggest that there is space for improvement in the treatment of MGC in Brazil.

The feasibility of dexamethasone omission in weekly paclitaxel treatment for breast cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with breast cancer who receive weekly paclitaxel therapy may experience deleterious effects associated with prophylactic dexamethasone use for 12 consecutive weeks. Approximately 90% of paclitaxel hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) occur within the first 10 to 15 min of the first two infusions. We investigated the feasibility of dexamethasone withdrawal between weeks 3 and 12 (W3 and W12) in early stage breast cancer patients treated with weekly paclitaxel at the standard dose (80 mg/m2). METHODS: All patients received intravenous prophylaxis of dexamethasone 20 mg, ranitidine 50 mg, and diphenhydramine 50 mg in the first 2 weeks (W1 and W2) of treatment. Provided that no serious (G3/G4) HSRs events occurred, dexamethasone was omitted between W3 and W12, while ranitidine and diphenhydramine were continued. The primary end point was the incidence of any grade HSRs during the treatment period, and the secondary end points were quality of life and weight changes. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were included in the study, and 300 infusion cycles of paclitaxel were evaluated for HSRs. The overall incidence of HSRs was 0.6% (2 events), and both of these events occurred in the first week. There were no incidents of serious HSRs or anaphylaxis and no G3 or G4 toxicities. Scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire did not change significantly for the global health status/quality of life scale or for the symptoms scales, although changes in scores differed significantly for the functional scales. There were no clinically relevant weight changes during the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: Dexamethasone withdrawal from W3 to W12 in early stage breast cancer patients treated with weekly paclitaxel is feasible. The incidence of all grades of HSRs was comparable to that reported in trials with dexamethasone for 12 consecutive weeks, and no serious events (G3/G4) occurred. Studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm our results which are important, especially for patients for whom corticosteroids are contraindicated.

Chemotherapy-induced fatigue is associated with changes in gene expression in the peripheral blood mononuclear cell fraction of patients with locoregional breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced fatigue (CIF) is a frequent symptom that impairs patient functioning and quality of life. We aimed to evaluate whether systemic chemotherapy can induce a specific gene expression profile in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMNC) of patients with locoregional breast cancer (LRBC) who develop CIF. METHODS: PBMNC were collected from 3 patients who developed CIF before and after their initial cycle of chemotherapy, and RNA-seq was performed in an Ion Torrent™ System. A total of 12.345 transcripts were sequenced, of which 26 were selected out of 71 that had significantly different expression before and after chemotherapy. The RNA-seq results were validated by RT-qPCR in a different group of 28 patients with LRBC who developed CIF after their first cycle of chemotherapy and in six patients who also received chemotherapy but did not develop CIF (controls). We assessed CIF according the BFI and Chalder Questionnaires. RESULTS: We observed a significant increase in expression of DUSP18 and RHOBTB1 and decreased expression of NCAN and RAET1G in patients who developed CIF after chemotherapy. Control patients only exhibited a significant decrease in NCAN expression. CONCLUSION: CIF induces specific changes in gene expression in the PBMNC of LRBC patients. Some of these changes, such as downregulation of NCAN expression, may reflect direct effects of chemotherapy since they are also observed in the controls. Furthermore, CIF may involve downregulation of skeletal muscle genes (RHOBT1, DUSP18) and immune systems (RAETG1), whereas NCAN downregulation may underlie the adverse cognitive effects of chemotherapy.

Gabapentin for the prevention of chemotherapy- induced nausea and vomiting: a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a distressing side effect that affects many patients undergoing emetogenic chemotherapy, despite the use of antiemetic medications. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of gabapentin for the prevention of CINV during the first cycle of treatment in patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. METHODS: Eighty chemotherapy-naive patients, scheduled to receive moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy, were enrolled in this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. All patients received intravenous ondansetron 8 mg, dexamethasone 10 mg and ranitidine 50 mg before chemotherapy on day 1 and oral dexamethasone 4 mg twice a day on days 2 and 3. Patients were randomly assigned to take gabapentin 300 mg or placebo on the following schedule: 5 and 4 days before chemotherapy once daily, 3 and 2 days before chemotherapy twice daily, 1 day before to 5 days after chemotherapy thrice daily. The primary endpoint was complete overall protection from both vomiting and nausea over the course of the entire study (day 1 through day 5), and complete protection during the delayed period (24-120 h after chemotherapy). RESULTS: The proportion of patients achieving complete response improved from 40% to 62.5%, (p = 0.04) when comparing the control group and the gabapentin group, respectively. In the subset of patients who achieved complete control in the acute phase, the percentage of patients who achieved delayed complete control was higher in the gabapentin group (89.3 × 60.7%, p = 0.01). Adverse events did not significantly differ between study arms. CONCLUSIONS: Gabapentin is a low-cost strategy to improve complete control of CINV, specially delayed CINV control.