Search

Background: Body composition is an important predictor of drug toxicity and outcome. Ipilimumab (Ipi), a monoclonal antibody used to treat metastatic melanoma, has specific toxicities. No validated biomarkers that predict Ipi toxicity and efficacy exist. Also, the impact of Ipi on body composition has not been established. Methods: Patients with metastatic melanoma treated with Ipi between 2009 and 2015 were included. Body composition was assessed by computed tomography at baseline and after four cycles of Ipi. Sarcopenia and low muscle attenuation (MA) were defined using published cut-points. All adverse events (AEs) and immune-related AEs (irAEs) were recorded (Common Terminology Criteria For Adverse Event V.4.0). Results: Eighty-four patients were included in this study (62% male, median age 54 years). At baseline, 24% were sarcopenic and 33% had low MA. On multivariate analysis, sarcopenia and low MA were significantly associated with high-grade AEs (OR = 5.34, 95% CI: 1.15- 24.88, P = 0.033; OR = 5.23, 95% CI: 1.41-19.30, P = 0.013, respectively), and low MA was associated with high-grade irAEs (OR = 3.57, 95% CI: 1.09-11.77, P = 0.036). Longitudinal analysis (n = 59) revealed significant reductions in skeletal muscle area (SMA), total body fat-free mass, fat mass (all P= 7.5%/ 100 days (highest quartile) was a significant predictor of overall survival in multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.02-4.56, P = 0.046). Conclusions: Patients with sarcopenia and low MA are more likely to experience severe treatment-related toxicity to Ipi. Loss of muscle during treatment was predictive of worse survival. Treatments to increase muscle mass and influence outcome warrant further investigation.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to determine which consent procedure patients prefer for use of stored tissue for research purposes and what the effects of consent procedures on actual consenting behaviour are.METHODS: We offered 264 cancer patients three different consent procedures: 'one-time general consent' ( asked written informed consent), 'opt-out plus' ( had the opportunity to opt out by a form), or the standard hospital procedure ( control group). The two intervention groups received a specific leaflet about research with residual tissue and verbal information. The control group only received a general hospital leaflet including opt-out information, which is the procedure currently in use. Subsequently, all patients received a questionnaire to examine their preferences for consent procedures.RESULTS: In all, 99% of patients consented to research with their residual tissue. In the 'one-time consent' group 85% sent back their consent form. Patients preferred 'opt-out plus' (43%) above 'one-time consent' (34%) or 'opt-out' (16%), whereas 8% indicated that they did not need to receive information about research with residual tissues or be given the opportunity to make a choice.CONCLUSIONS: The 'opt-out plus' procedure, which places fewer demands on administrative resources than 'one-time consent', can also address the information needs of patients. British Journal of Cancer ( 2009) 101, 1505-1512. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605339 www.bjcancer.com Published online 29 September 2009 (C) 2009 Cancer Research UK

BACKGROUND: Leukaemic patients receiving intensive chemotherapy and patients undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) are routinely screened for oral foci of infection to reduce infectious complications that could occur during therapy. In this prospective study we assessed the effect of leaving chronic oral foci of infection untreated on the development of infectious complications in intensively treated haematological patients.METHODS: We included and prospectively evaluated all intensively treated leukaemic patients and patients undergoing ASCT who were referred to our medical centre between September 2012 and May 2014, and who matched the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Acute oral foci of infection were removed before chemotherapy or ASCT, whereas chronic oral foci were left untreated.RESULTS: In total 28 leukaemic and 35 ASCT patients were included. Acute oral foci of infection were found in 2 leukaemic (7%) and 2 ASCT patients (6%), and chronic oral foci of infection in 24 leukaemic (86%) and 22 ASCT patients (63%). Positive blood cultures with microorganisms potentially originating from the oral cavity occurred in 7 patients during treatment, but were uneventful on development of infectious complications.CONCLUSIONS: Our prospective study supports the hypothesis that chronic oral foci of infection can be left untreated as this does not increase infectious complications during intensive chemotherapy.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 22 March 2016; doi:10.1038/bjc.2016.60 www.bjcancer.com.

5-fluorouracil pharmacokinetics, dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase-activity and DNA sequence analysis were compared between a patient with extreme 5-fluorouracil induced toxicity and six control patients with normal 5-fluorouracil related symptoms. Patients were treated for colorectal cancer and received chemotherapy consisting of leucovorin 20 mg m−2 plus 5-fluorouracil 425 mg m−2. Blood sampling was carried out on day 1 of the first cycle. The 5-fluorouracil area under the curve0→3h in the index patient was 24.1 mg h l−1 compared to 9.8±3.6 (range 5.4–15.3) mg h l−1 in control patients. The 5-fluorouracil clearance was 520 ml min−1 vs 1293±302 (range 980–1780) ml min−1 in controls. The activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase in mononuclear cells was lower in the index patient (5.5 nmol mg h−1) compared to the six controls (10.3±1.6, range 8.0–11.7 nmol mg h−1). Sequence analysis of the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene revealed that the index patient was heterozygous for a IVS14+1G>A point mutation. Our results indicate that the inactivation of one dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase allele can result in a strong reduction in 5-fluorouracil clearance, causing severe 5-fluorouracil induced toxicity. British Journal of Cancer (2002) 86, 1028–1033. DOI: 10.1038/sj/bjc/6600199 www.bjcancer.com © 2002 Cancer Research UK