Trends in Use and Perceptions About Triplet Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Triplet chemotherapy with fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (FOLFOXIRI-B) is an effective first-line treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the degree of implementation of FOLFOXIRI-B in daily practice is unknown. Objectives: To evaluate the current adoption rate of FOLFOXIRI-B in patients with mCRC and investigate the perspectives of medical oncologists toward this treatment option. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 1-week, multicenter, cross-sectional study in the Netherlands used a flash mob design, which facilitates ultrafast data generation (flash) through the engagement of numerous researchers (mob). During the study week (March 1-5, 2021), patient data were retrieved from electronic health records of 47 hospitals on patients with mCRC who were referred to a medical oncologist between November 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021. Interviews were simultaneously conducted with 101 medical oncologists from 52 hospitals who regularly treat patients with mCRC. Exposure: First-line systemic treatment as determined by the treating physician. Main Outcomes and Measures: The FOLFOXIRI-B prescription rate was the main outcome. Current practice was compared with prescription rates in 2015 to 2018. Eligibility for treatment with FOLFOXIRI-B was estimated. An exploratory outcome was medical oncologists' reported perspectives on FOLFOXIRI-B. Results: A total of 5948 patients in the Netherlands (median age [interquartile range], 66 [57-73] years; 3503 [59%] male; and 3712 [62%] with left-sided or rectal tumor) were treated with first-line systemic therapy for synchronous mCRC. A total of 282 patients with mCRC underwent systemic therapy during the study period (2021). Of these 282 patients, 199 (71%) were treated with intensive first-line therapy other than FOLFOXIRI-B, of whom 184 (65%) were treated with oxaliplatin doublets with or without bevacizumab; 14 (5%) with irinotecan doublets with or without bevacizumab, panitumumab, or cetuximab; and 1 (0.4%) with irinotecan with bevacizumab. Fifty-four patients (19%) were treated with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy with or without bevacizumab, 1 patient (0.4%) with panitumumab monotherapy, and 3 (1%) with immune checkpoint inhibitors. In total, 25 patients (9%; 95% CI, 6%-12%) were treated with first-line FOLFOXIRI-B compared with 142 (2%; 95% CI, 2%-3%) in 2015 to 2018. During the study period, 21 of 157 eligible patients (13.4%) in the Netherlands were treated with FOLFOXIRI-B. A total of 87 medical oncologists (86%) reported discussing FOLFOXIRI-B as a treatment option with eligible patients. A total of 47 of 85 (55%) generally communicated a preference for a chemotherapy doublet to patients. These oncologists reported a significantly lower awareness of guidelines and trial results. Toxic effects were the most reported reason to prefer an alternative regimen. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that FOLFOXIRI-B prescription rates have marginally increased in the last 5 years. Considering that most medical oncologists discuss this treatment option, the prescription rate found in this study was below expectations. Awareness of guidelines and trial data seems to contribute to the discussion of available treatment options by medical oncologists, and the findings of this study suggest a need for repeated and continuing medical education.

NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) for the antiemetic prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy (CINV) with Folfirinox and Folfoxiri even during the COVID-19 pandemic: a real-life study.

OBJECTIVE: The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the treatment of cancer patients, with particular regard to the management of both chemotherapy and side effects. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are amongst the most troublesome side effects that impair patients' adherence to treatments and their quality of life (QoL). NEPA (Akynzeo®), is an oral fixed-dose combination of netupitant [a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA), 300 mg] and palonosetron [(5-hydroxytryptamine (serotonin or 5HT) type3 receptor antagonist (5HT3RA), 0.5 mg] which has been shown to be effective in preventing CINV. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective study started before the outbreak of COVID-19 and was carried out during the pandemic period. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single oral dose NEPA plus 12 mg of dexamethasone (DEX) in patients treated with Folfoxiri plus Bevacizumab and Folfirinox. The patients were diagnosed with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) or advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). They were divided into two groups: naïve patients and patients previously treated with serotonin receptor antagonists (5HT3-RA) and neurokin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1-RA). RESULTS: During the overall phase, the complete response (CR) rate was 96.8% in naïve patients treated with Folfoxiri plus Bevacizumab, and 94.6% in patients treated with Folfirinox. During the acute and delayed phases, the CR rate was 92.8% and 94.2%, with Folfoxiri and Bevacizumab, as well as 96.2% and 94.6%, with Folfirinox. There was no adequate control of CINV events in patients on antiemetic prophylaxis with 5HT3-RA or NK1-RA associated with cortisone. During the overall phase, the CR rate was 74.6% with Folfoxiri plus Bevacizumab and 75.8% with Folfirinox. During the acute and delayed phases, the CR rate was 72.5% and 74.8% with Folfoxiri plus Bevacizumab, as well as 75.2% and 74.6% with Folfirinox. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown the therapeutic benefits of NEPA in the management and prophylaxis of CINV events, both in naive patients and patients previously treated with 5HT3-RA and NK1-RA. In addition, NEPA has been shown to be safe, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Profile of patients receiving intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections during COVID-19-related lockdown.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze the impact on vision due to delay in presentation of patients requiring intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections, consequent to COVID-19-related travel restrictions. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively of patients who received anti-VEGF injections during four months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Visual acuities, indication for treatment were noted along with basic demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 303 eyes of 263 patients. The indication for treatment was age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in 60 eyes (19.8%), while 162 eyes (53.5%) had Diabetic Macular Edema, 71 eyes (23.4%) had Retinal Vein Occlusion and 10 eyes (3.3%) had other diagnosis. The visual acuity in the treatment naïve eyes (Group A, n = 168) was significantly worse (P <0.001) than those who presented for retreatment (Group B, n = 135). In Group B, there was a significant decline in vision for the entire cohort (P = 0.009) and those with AMD (P = 0.036). Those in Group B presented at a mean interval of 19.1 ± 10.6 (range, 4-64) weeks for retreatment. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a delay in patients receiving anti-VEGF injections. The visual acuity is worse in both treatment naïve as well as those requiring retreatment. This could have long-term impact on vision of patients requiring this vision preserving treatment.

Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents during COVID-19 pandemic: clinical audit from Tanta University Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to provide real-life data about the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on the practice of anti-VEGF injections and to evaluate the safety of the modifications in the injection protocol imposed during the ongoing pandemic on the anatomical and functional outcome of patients. METHODS: All patients attending Tanta University hospital for receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF injections were screened. Patients who were previously deferred according to a modified protocol implemented in the hospital in response to the pandemic or who demonstrated deviation from it were included for further analysis. RESULTS: During the audit period, 83 patients attending for anti-VEGF injections were screened, of whom 40 met the abovementioned criteria and were included for analysis. In the deferred subgroup (11 eyes), predeferral mean values of logMAR best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal subfield thickness (CST) were 1 ± 0.23 and 444.57 ± 200.1 µm, respectively. There was no significant change when the patients returned for their deferred injections, with the mean BCVA and CST values being 0.8 ± 0.22 and 413.71 ± 237.7 µm, respectively (p = 0.27 and p = 0.12). Moreover, 29 patients encountered a disturbed injection schedule, particularly skipping their injection appointments due to infection fear as found in 18 patients. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed pressing challenges in maintaining essential health care while ensuring the prevention of spread of infection. Although the modified injection protocol confirmed to be safe for patients, the pandemic caused deflection from the optimum practice in the form of successive skipping of appointments and delays in the processing of patient injection schedules.