ABSTRACT
A consensus document on early palliative care was produced by a committed Working Group of the Italian Society of Medical Oncology and the Italian Society of Palliative Care to improve the early integration of palliative care in medical oncology and to stimulate and guide the choices of those who daily face the problems of advanced stage cancer patients. The simultaneous administration of antineoplastic treatments and early palliative care was shown to be beneficial in metastatic cancer pathway outcomes. Patients who could benefit from early palliative care are those with an advanced cancer at presentation, a compromised PS for cancer, and/or morbidities, and who are too frail to receive treatment. According to the Bruera practice models, in which the combination of cancer management with early palliative care can be offered, three groups of patients needing simultaneous care were identified and three different models of the delivery of palliative care were proposed. In patients with good prognosis and low need of simultaneous care, the solo practice model and the request for consultations were suggested, while in patients with poor prognosis disease with high need of simultaneous care and in conditions with high need of simultaneous care, regardless of cancer prognosis, the integrated care approach should be offered. Palliative care consultation services are seldom accessible in the majority of Italian hospitals; thus the application of various practice models depends on available resources, and a shared care model with the structures of palliative care operating in the area is often required.
Subject(s)
Medical Oncology/methods , Medical Oncology/standards , Palliative Care/methods , Palliative Care/standards , Humans , ItalyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: ERCC1 (excision repair cross-complementation group 1) expression predicts survival in patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) treated with chemoradiation. In order to evaluate the predictive role in the adjuvant setting, we investigated ERCC1 expression in radically resected HNSCC patients who underwent surgery and cisplatin chemoradiation. METHODS: ERCC1 expression levels were determined by immunohistochemistry in primary tumor tissues from 48 patients with stage III-IV cancers. The median follow-up was 38.5 months (range: 5-121). RESULTS: High ERCC1 expression was observed in 36 (75%) patients. Univariate analysis showed that patients with high levels of ERCC1 had significantly worse disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) than patients with low levels (HR = 7.15; 95% CI, 1.68-30.35; p = 0.008 and HR = 9.90; 95% CI, 1.33-73.96; p = 0.025, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, high ERCC1 expression (HR = 7.36; 95% CI, 1.72-31.4; p = 0.007) together with high-risk category (HR = 2.69; 95% CI, 1.01-7.18; p = 0.048) were the best predictors for relapse. High ERCC1 expression was the only unfavorable independent determinant for OS (HR = 9.53; 95% CI, 1.27-71.35; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: This investigation suggests that ERCC1 expression might be useful to predict prognosis in radically resected HNSCC patients treated with surgery and chemoradiation.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/genetics , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , DNA-Binding Proteins/genetics , Endonucleases/genetics , Genetic Predisposition to Disease/genetics , Head and Neck Neoplasms/drug therapy , Head and Neck Neoplasms/genetics , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/radiotherapy , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery , Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Head and Neck Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Head and Neck Neoplasms/surgery , Humans , Immunohistochemistry/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/genetics , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/radiotherapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Predictive Value of Tests , PrognosisABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Single-agent gemcitabine became standard first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after demonstration of superiority compared with fluorouracil. The Gruppo Italiano Pancreas 1 randomized phase III trial aimed to compare gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT00813696). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, age 18 to 75 years, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or = 50, were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (arm A) or gemcitabine plus cisplatin (arm B). Arm A: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks, and, after a 1-week rest, on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Arm B: cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) added weekly to gemcitabine, except cycle 1 day 22. Primary end point was overall survival. To have 8% power of detecting a 0.74 hazard ratio (HR) of death, with bilateral alpha .05, 355 events were needed and 400 patients planned. RESULTS: Four hundred patients were enrolled (arm A: 199; arm B: 201). Median age was 63, 59% were male, 84% had stage IV, and 83% had KPS > or = 80. Median overall survival was 8.3 months versus 7.2 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.35; P = .38). Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months versus 3.8 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.19; P = .80). The objective response rate was 10.1% in A and 12.9% in B (P = .37). Clinical benefit was experienced by 23.0% in A and 15.1% in B (P = .057). Combination therapy produced more hematologic toxicity, without relevant differences in nonhematologic toxicity. CONCLUSION: The addition of weekly cisplatin to gemcitabine failed to demonstrate any improvement as first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.
