Cutaneous adverse events and quality of life in outpatients receiving anticancer agents: results from an observational, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Despite growing interest in cutaneous adverse events (CAEs) and their management in patients with cancer, they are often underreported and there are no extensive data on their impact on quality of life (QoL). Healthcare professionals should consider this issue in order to minimize its negative impact on QoL and improve patient outcomes. This study evaluates the impact of CAEs on QoL in outpatients receiving anticancer drugs and aims to determine the differences in QoL between conventional chemotherapy versus targeted therapies. METHODS: A total of 114 cancer patients with CAEs were included in this observational, cross-sectional study. Patient-reported outcomes instruments (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General, Dermatology Life Quality Index, and Skindex-16) were used. RESULTS: Mean scores in QoL indices were 65.3±13.4, 8.4±5, and 30.8±16.9 in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General, Dermatology Life Quality Index, and Skindex-16, respectively. The CAEs that had the greatest impact on dermatologic-related QoL were hand-foot skin reaction, rash, palmo-plantar erythrodysesthesia, and papulopustular eruption. No significant differences in QoL indices according to the type of treatment (conventional chemotherapy versus targeted therapy) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: CAEs, and particularly hand-foot toxicities, rashes, and papulopustular eruptions, can have an impact on QoL in outpatients receiving anticancer drugs as evaluated with three different patient-reported outcomes instruments. No differences in QoL related to CAEs were observed between conventional chemotherapy and targeted therapy.

Clear-cell adenocarcinoma of vesical origin: a case study of metastatic disease treated with chemotherapy.

Vesical clear cell adenocarcinoma is an uncommon tumour. The description of nearly all published cases focuses on histological issues, providing few clinical particulars and limited followup. The treatment choice is resection. No publications have been found regarding systemic treatments for advanced disease. We present a case of metastatic clear cell adenocarcinoma of the bladder treated with chemotherapy.

Spanish Society of Medical Oncology consensus on the use of erythropoietic stimulating agents in anaemic cancer patients.

Treatment of anaemia is a very important aspect in the management of cancer patients. In order to carry out a consensus process about the use of erythropoietic stimulating agents (ESAs) in cancer patients, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) elaborated a working group which coordinated a panel of medical oncology specialists. This working group has reviewed the main issues about the use of ESAs. In addition a consensus meeting was held in Madrid on 25 April 2007. The following conclusions were made: Since ESA treatment increases the haemoglobin (Hb) level and decreases the red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirements, ESAs should be used within the approved indications in patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment, beginning at a Hb level below 11 g/dl and maintaining it around 12 g/dl, with iron supplements if necessary. Neither increasing the ESA dose in nonresponders nor the use of ESAs in the treatment of chronic cancer-related anaemia is recommended.

Spanish Society of Medical Oncology consensus for the use of haematopoietic colony-stimulating factors in cancer patients.

Neutropenia is a common complication of cancer chemotherapy. Colony-stimulating factors (CSF) may be used to avoid neutropenia-associated complications. The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) recently constituted a working group to review the main issues concerning the use of CSF and carried out a consensus process about the use of CSF in cancer patients, held in Madrid on 26 May 2006. The group concluded the following recommendations: prophylactic use of CSF is recommended when a rate of febrile neutropenia (FN) higher than 20% is expected without the use of CSF or when additional risk factors for neutropenia exist; therapeutic use of CSF is recommended in order to treat FN episodes but not to treat afebrile neutropenic episodes. In addition, the use of CSF is considered effective when used to mobilise stem cells before high-dose chemotherapy and when used for chemotherapy schedule optimisation in dose-dense and in dose-intense regimens.

Clinical practice guidelines on antiemetics in oncology.

The tolerability of chemotherapy has been significantly improved by the advent of effective drugs and protocols for the amelioration of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Variables such as the timing of nausea and vomiting (acute, delayed or anticipatory) and the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy must be taken into account in developing guidelines for antiemetic prophylaxis and treatment. Although there are a number of 5-hydroxytryptamine antagonists available, the clinical differences between them are small. The use of drugs with a different mechanism of action, such as the recently introduced neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist aprepitant, may be a useful adjunct to 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists or steroid prophylaxis. The addition of aprepitant to standard antiemetic regimens increases the proportion of complete responses to antiemetic therapy. For the use of highly emetogenic chemotherapy in oncology a combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone and aprepitant is recommended in the acute phase, and dexamethasone plus aprepitant during the subsequent days (many patients do not have their symptoms controlled by 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and steroid alone). In either case, lorazepam can be added as required. For moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, a regimen of 5-hydroxytryptamine, dexamethasone and aprepitant is recommended in the acute phase, followed by aprepitant alone in the delayed phase. Alternatively, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone can be used in the acute phase, followed by dexamethasone for prophylaxis in the delayed phase. For chemotherapy with a low emetogenicity, either dexamethasone, metoclopramide, prochlorperazine or triethyperazine alone is recommended. No prophylaxis is generally required during the delayed phase and indeed may not be necessary during the acute phase either.