Variation in gynecological oncology follow-up practice: attributable to cancer centers or to patient characteristics? A Piedmont Regional Oncology Network Study.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Although guidelines recommend minimalist follow-up, there is wide variability in gynecological oncology practice. The aims of this study were to describe between-center differences in the follow-up of endometrial, ovarian, and uterine cervical cancer; to identify the determinants of test prescription; to estimate the related costs; and to assess the weight of center habits and patient characteristics as sources of unexplained variability. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: The medical records of patients treated between August 2004 and July 2005 for gynecological malignancies and followed up for the detection of recurrent disease were retrospectively collected from 29 centers of the Piedmont Oncology Network. Multivariate multilevel analyses were performed to study the determinants of test prescription and costs. RESULTS: Analyses were performed on 351 patients (median follow-up: 578 days). The unexplained variability in computed tomography prescriptions (26%), ultrasound prescriptions (17%), and total cost of follow-up (15%) can be attributed to center habits, independenty of the clinical characteristics of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Much of the unexplained variability in the follow-up for gynecological malignancies is attributable to different habits of centers belonging to a cancer network. These results prompted us to design a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare minimalist versus intensive follow-up programs in endometrial cancer.

Primary chemotherapy with epirubicin and vinorelbine in women with locally advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: To assess the activity and toxicity of primary chemotherapy with epirubicin (60 mg/m2 every other week) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2, weekly) plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for 12 weeks, in patients with locally advanced breast cancer in a multicenter setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIA or IIIB breast cancer, not older than 70, were eligible. A two-stage phase II design was applied. Response was assessed clinically, instrumentally and pathologically. RESULTS: Out of 48 enrolled patients, 87.5% received all planned cycles, with a median dose-intensity of 30 mg/m2/week for epirubicin and 23.8 mg/m2/week for vinorelbine. A clinical or instrumental objective response was reached in 42 patients (87.5%, exact 95% CI: 74.7-95.3); significant downstaging was reached in all but one patient; 6 cases had a pathological complete response in the breast, and 2 cases in the lymph nodes too (pathological complete response rate 4.2%, exact 95% CI: 0.5-14.2); a further 2 patients had only microscopic cancer foci at pathological examination of the breast. Radiological tests underestimated the treatment effect on the breast. Toxicity was mild, neutropenia being the most frequent (grade 3-4 in 47% of patients), but never complicated with fever or sepsis. Mild constipation (< or =grade 2) occurred in 35% of patients. Moderate to severe asthenia occurred in 12% of 6 patients. No cardiac toxicity was reported. At 3 years, disease-free survival was 68% and overall survival 81%. CONCLUSION: Primary chemotherapy with epirubicin every other week, weekly vinorelbine and G-CSF support is highly active and well tolerated in patients with locally advanced breast cancer.

Concomitant versus sequential administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy in metastatic breast carcinoma: results for the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The authors performed a randomized trial comprising patients with metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC). They used a noninferiority design to evaluate whether the results of sequential administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel were not markedly worse than the concomitant administration in terms of objective response rates (ORRs). Toxicity profile, quality of life (QOL), and pharmacoeconomic evaluations were evaluated as well. METHODS: In the current study, 202 patients with MBC were randomized to receive either the combination of epirubicin at a dose of 90 mg/m2 plus paclitaxel at a dose of 200 mg/m2 for 8 cycles (concomitant arm, n = 108) or epirubicin at a dose of 120 mg/m2 for 4 cycles followed by paclitaxel at a dose of 250 mg/m2 over 3 hours for 4 cycles every 21 days (sequential arm, n = 94). RESULTS: The authors rejected the null hypothesis that the sequential treatment is less active than the standard concomitant regimen (ORRs: concomitant = 58.5%, sequential = 57.6%). The median progression-free and overall survival periods were 11.0 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 9.7-12.3) and 20.0 months (95% CI, 17.2-22.6), respectively, in the concomitant arm and 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.9-13.6) and 26 months (95% CI, 18.1-33.8), respectively, in the sequential arm (P = not significant). Patients who received the sequential regimen experienced a higher incidence of Grade 3/4 (according to the World Health Organization grading system) neutropenia (62.2% of courses vs. 50.62%; P = 0.003) and Grade > or = 2 neuropathy (45.5% vs. 30.4% of patients; P = 0.03), whereas 6 patients who received the concomitant regimen developed Grade II cardiotoxicity according to New York Heart Association criteria. QOL analyses failed to provide clear differences. CONCLUSIONS: The sequential administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel at full doses was found to be as active as their association. Therefore, both the sequential and the combined administration were acceptable options.