No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

PurposeThis study aims to determine the incidence of nausea and vomiting (CINV) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), under medical practice conditions and the accuracy with which physicians perceive CINV.MethodsChemotherapy-naive patients receiving MEC between April 2012 and May 2013 were included. Patients completed a diary of the intensity of nausea and number of vomiting episodes. Complete response and complete protection were assessed as secondary endpoints.ResultsOf 261 patients included, 240 were evaluated. Median age was 64 years, 44.2 % were female and 11.2 % were aged less than 50 years; 95.3 % of patients received a combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) antagonist + corticosteroid as antiemetic treatment. Vomiting within 5 days of chemotherapy administration occurred in 20.8 %, nausea in 42 % and significant nausea in 23.8 % of patients. An increase in the percentage of patients with significant nausea (from 9.4 to 21.7 %) and vomiting (from 9.2 to 16.5 %) was observed from the acute to the delayed phase. Complete response was 84.2 % in the acute phase, 77 % in the late phase and 68.9 % in overall period. Complete protection was 79.5 % in the acute phase, 68.8 % in the late phase and 62.4 % throughout the study period. Physicians estimated prophylaxis would be effective for 75 % of patients receiving MEC, compared with 54.1 % obtained from patients’ diary.ConclusionDespite receiving prophylactic treatment, 31 % of patients did not achieve a complete response and 38 % complete protection. In general, nausea was worse controlled than vomiting. The results also showed the late phase was worse controlled than the acute phase in all variables. Healthcare providers overestimated the effectiveness of antiemetic prophylaxis.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00520-015-2809-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundThe Opti-HER HEART trial aimed to optimize activity while minimizing cardiac risk by combining trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and paclitaxel with non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in the treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer.MethodsPatients with stage II–IIIB HER2-positive breast cancer received neoadjuvant trastuzumab, pertuzumab, paclitaxel, and a non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin every three weeks for six cycles. The primary endpoint was cardiac safety during neoadjuvant therapy. Type A (symptomatic congestive heart failure) and B (asymptomatic reduction of left ventricular ejection fraction) cardiac events were evaluated. Secondary endpoints included the evaluation of the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and overall response rate, among others. As an ad-hoc exploratory analysis, the expression of 55 breast cancer-related genes, including the PAM50 genes, was measured in 58 baseline tumor samples and 60 surgical specimens.ResultsEighty-three patients were recruited. The incidence of cardiac events during neoadjuvant treatment was 2.4%. No type A cardiac event was observed. The overall pCR rate was 56.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 45.3–67.5%). The HER2-enriched subtype, which represented 52.0% of all baseline samples, was associated with a higher pCR rate compared to non-HER2-enriched tumors (83.3% vs. 46.3%; odds ratio 5.76, 95% CI 1.71–19.42). The association of subtype with pCR was independent of known clinicopathological variables, including hormone receptor status. Compared to baseline samples, surgical specimens showed a significant downregulation of proliferation-related genes (MKI67 and CCNB1) and ERBB2 levels, and a significant upregulation of luminal-related (ESR1 and PGR) and immune (CD8A) genes.ConclusionsThe combination of dual HER2 blockade with trastuzumab and pertuzumab with paclitaxel and non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is associated with a low rate of cardiac events. The HER2-enriched subtype is associated with a high rate of pCR.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov, NCT01669239, Registered 20 August 2012.

No abstract

One of the most common side effects of cancer treatment is cardiovascular disease, which substantially impacts long-term survivor’s prognosis. Cardiotoxicity can be related with either a direct side effect of antitumor therapies or an accelerated development of cardiovascular diseases in the presence of preexisting risk factors. Even though it is widely recognized as an alarming clinical problem, scientific evidence is scarce in the management of these complications in cancer patients. Consequently, current recommendations are based on expert consensus. This Guideline represents SEOM’s ongoing commitment to progressing and improving supportive care for cancer patients.

Cancer pain should be controlled in most patients, however this is not always achieved. These guidelines describe the classification, evaluation and treatment of chronic cancer pain in accordance with the WHO treatment strategy of pain stages: mild, moderate and severe. For treatment during the third stage, we cover titration and rotation of opioids, as well as their side effects and prevention. Also described is neuropathic pain and refractory pain, coadjuvant treatments and non pharmacological analgesic treatments. Finally, treatment of breakthrough pain is defined.