Search

Background: Six months of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is standard of care for radically resected stage III colon cancer and an accepted option for high-risk stage II. A shorter duration of therapy, if equally efficacious, would be advantageous for patients and Health-Care Systems. Patients and methods: TOSCA ['Randomized trial investigating the role of FOLFOX-4 or XELOX (3 versus 6 months) regimen duration and bevacizumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with stage II/III colon cancer] is an open-label, phase III, multicenter, noninferiority trial randomizing patients with high-risk stage II or stage III radically resected colon cancer to receive 3 months (arm 3 m) versus 6 months (arm 6 m) of FOLFOX4/XELOX. Primary end-point was relapse-free survival. We present here safety and compliance data. Results: From June 2007 to March 2013, 3759 patients were accrued from 130 Italian sites, 64% receiving FOLFOX4 and 36% XELOX in either arm. Treatment completion rate without any modification was 35% versus 12% and with delays or dose reduction 52% versus 44% in arm 3 and 6 m. Treatment was permanently discontinued in 8% (arm 3 m) and 33% (arm 6 m). In arm 6 m, 50% of patients discontinuing treatment did so after completing 80% of planned program. Grade 3+ toxicities were higher in arm 6 m than that in 3 m. Grade 2+ neuropathy was 31.2% versus 8.8% (P < 0.0001) while grade 3+ was 8.4 versus 1.3 (P < 0.0001), in arm 3 and 6 m. Seven deaths within 30 days from last treatment administration in arm 6 m and three deaths in arm 3 m were observed (0.3% versus 0.1%, P = 0.34). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy in gastric cancer has been reported to be effective by several meta-analyses. Perioperative chemotherapy in locally advanced resectable gastric cancer (RGC) has been reported improving survival by two large randomized trials and recent meta-analyses but the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal regimen remains to be determined. We compared a neoadjuvant with adjuvant docetaxel-based regimen in a prospective randomized phase III trial, of which we present the 10-year follow-up data. Patients and methods: Patients with cT3-4 anyN M0 or anyT cN1-3 M0 gastric carcinoma, staged with endoscopic ultrasound, computed tomography, bone scan, and laparoscopy, were assigned to receive four 21-day/cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m² day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m² day 1, and fluorouracil 300 mg/m²/day over days 1-14, either before (arm A) or after (arm B) gastrectomy. Event-free survival was the primary end point, whereas secondary end points included overall survival, toxicity, down-staging, pathological response, quality of life, and feasibility of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: This trial was activated in November 1999 and closed in November 2005 due to insufficient accrual. Of the 70 enrolled patients, 69 were randomized, 34 to arm A and 35 to arm B. No difference in EFS (2.5 years in both arms) or OS (4.3 versus 3.7 years, in arms A and B, respectively) was found. A higher dose intensity of chemotherapy was observed in arm A and more frequent chemotherapy-related serious adverse events occurred in arm B. Surgery was safe after preoperative chemotherapy. A 12% pathological complete response was observed in arm A. Conclusion: Docetaxel/cisplatin/fluorouracil chemotherapy is promising in preoperative setting of locally advanced RGC. The early stopping could mask the real effectiveness of neoadjuvant treatment. However, the complete pathological tumour responses, feasibility, and safe surgery warrant further investigation of a taxane-based regimen in the preoperative setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central venous access is extensively used in oncology, though practical information from randomized trials on the most convenient insertion modality and site is unavailable. Methods: Four hundred and three patients eligible for receiving i.v. chemotherapy for solid tumors were randomly assigned to implantation of a single type of port (Bard Port™, Bard Inc., Salt Lake City, UT), through a percutaneous landmark access to the internal jugular, a ultrasound (US)-guided access to the subclavian or a surgical cut-down access through the cephalic vein at the deltoid–pectoralis groove. Early and late complications were prospectively recorded until removal of the device, patients death or ending of the study. Results: Four hundred and one patients (99.9%) were assessable: 132 with the internal jugular, 136 with the subclavian and 133 with the cephalic vein access. The median follow-up was 356.5 days (range 0–1087). No differences were found for early complication rate in the three groups {internal jugular: 0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0% to 2.7%], subclavian: 0% (95% CI 0.0% to 2.7%), cephalic: 1.5% (95% CI 0.1% to 5.3%)}. US-guided subclavian insertion site had significantly lower failures (e.g. failed attempts to place the catheter in agreement with the original arm of randomization, P = 0.001). Infections occurred in one, three and one patients (internal jugular, subclavian and cephalic access, respectively, P = 0.464), whereas venous thrombosis was observed in 15, 8 and 11 patients (P = 0.272). Conclusions: Central venous insertion modality and sites had no impact on either early or late complication rates, but US-guided subclavian insertion showed the lowest proportion of failures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure (HF) is a complex clinical syndrome resulting from any structural or functional cardiac disorder impairing the ability of the ventricles to fill with or eject blood. The approach to pharmacologic treatment has become a combined preventive and symptomatic management strategy. Ideally, treatment should be initiated in patients at risk, preventing disease progression. In patients who have progressed to symptomatic left ventricular dysfunction, certain therapies have been demonstrated to improve survival, decrease hospitalizations, and reduce symptoms. The mainstay therapies are angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and beta-blockers (bisoprolol, carvedilol, and metoprolol XL/CR), with diuretics to control fluid balance. In patients who cannot tolerate ACE inhibitors because of angioedema or severe cough, valsartan can be substituted. Valsartan should not be added in patients already taking an ACE inhibitor and a beta-blocker. Spironolactone is recommended in patients who have New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III to IV symptoms despite maximal therapies with ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, diuretics, and digoxin. Low-dose digoxin, yielding a serum concentration <1 ng/mL can be added to improve symptoms and, possibly, mortality. The combination of hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate might be useful in patients (especially in African Americans) who cannot tolerate ACE inhibitors or valsartan because of hypotension or renal dysfunction. Calcium antagonists, with the exception of amlodipine, oral or intravenous inotropes, and vasodilators, should be avoided in HF with reduced systolic function. Amiodarone should be used only if patients have a history of sudden death, or a history of ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia, and should be used in conjunction with an implantable defibrillator [corrected]. Finally, anticoagulation is recommended only in patients who have concomitant atrial fibrillation or a previous history of cerebral or systemic emboli. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]