Real-life data of abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide treatment in post-chemotherapy metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in Poland.

Background: Abiraterone acetate (ABI) and Enzalutamide (ENZA) are second-generation hormone drugs that show breakthrough activity in post-chemotherapy, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The leading oncological and urological guidelines indicate both drugs with the same strong recommendation. There is a lack of randomized trials which compare the efficacy of ABI and ENZA. The current study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the drugs with an analysis of prognostic factors related to those drugs. Patients and methods: The study included 420 patients with docetaxel (DXL) pretreated mCRPC from seven Polish cancer centers. Patients were treated according to inclusion and exclusion criteria in the Polish national drug program (1000 mg ABI and 10 mg prednisone, n=76.2%; ENZA, 160 mg; n=23.8%). The study retrospectively analyzed the overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF), PSA 50% decline rate (PSA 50%) and selected clinic-pathological data. Results: In the study group, the median OS was 17 months (95% CI: 15.6-18.3). The median OS (26.1 vs. 15.7 mo.; p<0.001), TTF (14.2 vs. 7.6 mo.; p<0.001) and PSA 50% (87.5 vs. 56%; p<0.001) were higher in ENZA than in ABI treatment. Multivariate analysis shows that ENZA treatment and PSA nadir <17.35 ng/mL during or after DXL treatment were related to longer TTF. ENZA treatment, DXL dose ≥750 mg, PSA nadir <17.35 ng/mL during or after DXL treatment was related to longer OS. Conclusions: ENZA treatment may be related to more favorable oncological outcomes than ABI treatment in the studied Polish population of patients. A 50% decline in PSA is an indicator of longer TTF and OS. Due to the non-randomized and retrospective nature of the analysis, the current results require prospective validation.

Prognostic Value of Sarcopenia in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Trifluridine/Tipiracil.

Sarcopenia is common in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), increases the risk of treatment-related toxicity and reduces survival. Trifluridine/tipiracil (TT) chemotherapy significantly improved survival in refractory mCRC patients, but the prognostic and predictive role of pretherapeutic sarcopenia and variation in the skeletal muscle index (SMI) during this treatment has not been investigated so far. In this retrospective, observational study, clinical data on mCRC patients treated with TT at six cancer centres in Poland were collected. Computed tomography (CT) scans acquired at the time of initiation of TT (CT1) and on the first restaging (CT2), were evaluated. SMI was assessed based on the skeletal muscle area (SMA) at the level of the third lumbar vertebra. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the treatment start. Neither initial sarcopenia nor ≥5% skeletal mass loss (SML) between CT1 and CT2 had a significant effect on PFS in treated patients (p = 0.5526 and p = 0.1092, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, reduced OS was found in patients with ≥5% SML (HR: 2.03 (1.11-3.72), p = 0.0039). We describe the prognostic role of sarcopenia beyond second line treatment and analyze other factors, such as performance status, tumor histological differentiation or carcinoembryonic antigen level that could predict TT treatment response.

Evaluation of the toxicity of anticancer chemotherapy in patients with colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Modern anticancer chemotherapy can cause numerous adverse effects in the organism, whose functioning has already been disrupted by the neoplastic process itself. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the frequency and severity of the toxicity of FOLFOX-4 and CLF-1 anticancer therapy in patients with colon cancer, and to analyze certain factors that might have increased the toxicity of the chemotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study involved 64 patients suffering from generalized colon cancer, including 48 patients treated according to the FOLFOX-4 regimen and 16 patients treated according to the CLF-1 regimen. The toxicity of each regimen was analyzed on the basis of a confidential questionnaire formulated by the authors and laboratory research according to the extended WHO toxicity criteria. RESULTS: The analysis of the symptoms of toxicity symptoms associated with the use of the FOLFOX-4 and CLF-1 therapeutic regimens revealed that the most common side effects included nausea and vomiting, despite ondansetron premedication, and neurotoxicity. Disruption of the functioning of the nervous system under the FOLFOX-4 regimen statistically significant exacerbation that increased with the number of chemotherapy cycles administered; this was more common and more severe in women. Paresthesia was also revealed to be a neurotoxic effect of the FOLFOX-4 regimen after termination of therapy. A statistically significant relationship was observed between the use of vitamin supplements and the incidence and severity of the toxicity of the FOLFOX-4 regimen. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the current study regarding the toxicity of the FOLFOX-4 and CLF-1 therapy regimens should be taken into consideration when monitoring chemotherapy safety in colon cancer. The patients' tolerance of the administered medication and the side effects reported by patients should be constantly evaluated, which will help prevent these side effects, apply appropriate therapy and contribute to the improvement of the patients' quality of life. The functioning of the central nervous system should be carefully evaluated when planning the anticancer therapy, especially if repeated administration of neurotoxic drugs is necessary in cases of a recurrence of the disease. Chemotherapy should be thoroughly monitored for safety, especially in women over 65 years of age suffering from coexisting diseases. Colon cancer patients and their families should be informed of the risks of nutritional supplements before the start of the anticancer chemotherapy, and may need to dispense with their use.

Clinical practice in febrile neutropenia risk assessment and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in Poland.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The first aim was to investigate the knowledge and awareness of oncologists concerning febrile neutropenia (FN) risk assessment and indications for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP), based on current therapeutic guidelines (PTOK and EORTC). The second aim was to educate the oncologists on best practices for risk assessment and neutropenia management. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The project participants included 169 oncologists from 7 regions working in large specialist oncological centres, university hospitals, regional and city hospitals, specialist outpatient clinics, and oncological wards in small local hospitals. The participants completed a questionnaire based on seven prepared clinical cases of patients with different tumour types and patient characteristics, receiving chemotherapy (CT), and with different levels of FN risk. Participants answered questions related to FN risk assessment and G-CSF use. After completing the questionnaire, the participants proceeded to an educational module in which they were provided with an analysis of correct diagnostic and therapeutic procedures according to the PTOK and EORTC guidelines. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Febrile neutropenia risk assessment was found to be a routine procedure performed for over 90% of the clinical cases by the participant oncologists. However, the FN risk assessment of clinical cases was correct and consistent with therapeutic guidelines in only 65% of responses. Indications for G-CSF PP were properly identified in 76% of responses and it appeared that indications for G-CSF PP were more likely to be correctly identified in patients receiving high-risk or low-risk regimens than in those receiving intermediate-risk regimens, where the decision to give G-CSF PP is based on additional assessment of patient risk factors. The vast majority of participants who correctly identified the need for PP administered G-CSF in accordance with the dose and schedule recommended by PTOK and EORTC.

Clinical practice in secondary prophylaxis and management of febrile neutropenia in Poland: results of the febrile neutropenia awareness project.

AIM OF THE STUDY: This paper presents the second part of the GoPractice project involving oncologists from seven Polish provinces. The aim of this part of the project was to assess the knowledge of oncologists on indications for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) secondary prophylaxis (SP) of febrile neutropenia (FN) and FN management based on current therapeutic guidelines (Polish Society of Clinical Oncology [PTOK] and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC]). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The project involved 169 oncologists from 7 regions working in large specialist oncological centers, university hospitals, regional and city hospitals, specialist outpatient clinics and oncological wards in small, local hospitals. The participants completed a questionnaire based on 7 prepared clinical cases of patients with different tumor types and patient characteristics, receiving chemotherapy (CT) with different levels of FN risk. Participants answered questions related to FN risk assessment and G-CSF use as secondary prophylaxis (SP) and for the management of FN. After completing the questionnaire, the participants proceeded to an educational module in which they were provided with an analysis of correct diagnostic and therapeutic procedures according to the PTOK and EORTC guidelines. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Indications for G-CSF SP were generally well recognized: in nearly 90% of responses, oncologists assessed correctly indications/lack of indications for secondary prophylaxis, in accordance with guideline recommendations and Experts' opinion. However, the use of daily G-CSFs was often recommended by the study participants for the management of FN. This clinical practice is contradictory to PTOK and EORTC recommendations and may unnecessarily increase treatment costs. Changing this clinical approach may be achieved through regular training to improve guideline adherence.

The Polish Cancer Anemia Survey (POLCAS): a retrospective multicenter study of 999 cases.

The purpose of the retrospective study in cancer patients in Poland was to analyze the frequency of anemia and methods of its treatment. An attempt was also made to evaluate the hemoglobin (Hb) levels in relation to patient's performance status (PS) prior to and after anticancer treatment. A total of 999 patients (pts) were enrolled, who were followed for up to six chemotherapy cycles or six evaluation points within a 6-month period. The incidence of anemia at the time of enrollment into the study equaled 31%, and was observed mainly among gynecologic and colorectal cancer pts. After anticancer treatment, anemia was reported in 54% of patients, mainly in gynecologic and lung cancer pts. As many as 71% of patients were anemic at some point of time during the survey, which was most often documented among gynecologic, lung and testicular cancer patients. At the 5th visit more than 50% of patients were anemic. The difference between the mean Hb level at 1st and 6th visit was 1.04 g/dL. However, anemia was treated in only 32% of patients (red blood cell transfusions, 61%; iron supplementation, 33%; while erythropoietic, stimulating proteins in just 6%). Worse PS was observed in anemic pts with lung as well as with head and neck cancer. In Poland the occurrence of anemia in cancer patients is as high as 70%. Anemia in this group of patients is underestimated and undertreated. This calls for more attention of physicians providing medical care to cancer patients.