Prevalence, characteristics, and treatment of fatigue in oncological cancer patients in Italy: a cross-sectional study of the Italian Network for Supportive Care in Cancer (NICSO).

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is one of the most distressing symptoms of cancer patients. Its characteristics and impact on quality of life have not been fully explored and treatment of cancer-related fatigue in Italian oncological centers has not been codified. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out on all patients attending for any reason the 24 participating centers in two non-consecutive days. Patients with fatigue filled out the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) questionnaire and reported any pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatment for fatigue. RESULTS: From October 2014 to May 2015, 1394 cancer patients agreed to participate in the study. Fatigue was referred by 866 (62.1%) of patients; its duration was > 4 months in 441 patients (50.9%). In the investigators' opinion, the most important (probable or almost sure) determinants of fatigue were reduced physical activity (271 patients), anxiety (149), pain (131), insomnia (125), anemia (123), and depression (123). Fatigue of moderate/severe intensity was reported by 43%/29.2% of patients, while usual fatigue in the last 24 h by 45%/33.1%, and the worst fatigue in the last 24 h by 33%/54.8%, respectively. Concerning the impact on quality of life, fatigue interfered moderately/severely with general activity in 30.8%/38.6% of patients, with mood in 26.1%/32.8%, with the ability to work in 27.9%/35.6%, with normal work in 26.7%/38.9%, with relationships with others in 21%/23.4% and with the ability to amuse themselves in 22.2%/33.1%. Only 117/866 patients (13.5%) received a pharmacological treatment represented by a corticosteroid in 101 patients (86.3%) while 188 patients (21.7%) received a non-pharmacological treatment such as physical exercise (120 patients, 63.8%) and various alimentary supplements (52 patients, 27.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer-related fatigue is frequently reported by oncological patients; its intensity and impact on quality of life is relevant.

Efficacy of Sym004 in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer With Acquired Resistance to Anti-EGFR Therapy and Molecularly Selected by Circulating Tumor DNA Analyses: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Acquired resistance to anti-EGFR therapy (epidermal growth factor receptor) is frequently due to RAS and EGFR extracellular domain (ECD) mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Some anti-EGFR-refractory patients retain tumor EGFR dependency potentially targetable by agents such as Sym004, which is a mixture of 2 nonoverlapping monoclonal antibodies targeting EGFR. OBJECTIVE: To determine if continuous blockade of EGFR by Sym004 has survival benefit. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, phase 2, randomized, clinical trial comparing 2 regimens of Sym004 with investigator's choice from March 6, 2014, through October 15, 2015. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was analyzed for biomarker and tracking clonal dynamics during treatment. Participants had wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC refractory to standard chemotherapy and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to Sym004, 12 mg/kg/wk (arm A), Sym004, 9 mg/kg loading dose followed by 6 mg/kg/wk (arm B), or investigator's choice of treatment (arm C). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included preplanned exploratory biomarker analysis in ctDNA. RESULTS: A total of 254 patients were randomized (intent-to-treat [ITT] population) (median age, 63 [range, 34-91] years; 63% male; n = 160). Median OS in the ITT population was 7.9 months (95% CI, 6.5-9.9 months), 10.3 months (95% CI, 9.0-12.9 months), and 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.3-12.2 months) for arms A, B, and C, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 0.92-1.87 for A vs C; and HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.68-1.40 for B vs C). The ctDNA revealed high intrapatient genomic heterogeneity following anti-EGFR therapy. Sym004 effectively targeted EGFR ECD-mutated cancer cells, and a decrease in EGFR ECD ctDNA occurred in Sym004-treated patients. However, this did not translate into clinical benefit in patients with EGFR ECD mutations, likely owing to co-occurring resistance mechanisms. A subgroup of patients was defined by ctDNA (RAS/BRAF/EGFR ECD-mutation negative) associated with improved OS in Sym004-treated patients in arm B compared with arm C (median OS, 12.8 and 7.3 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Sym004 did not improve OS in an unselected population of patients with mCRC and acquired anti-EGFR resistance. A prospective clinical validation of Sym004 efficacy in a ctDNA molecularly defined subgroup of patients with refractory mCRC is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrialsregister.eu Identifier: 2013-003829-29.

[Cancer-related fatigue]. / La fatigue cancro-correlata.

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a very common and distressing symptom experienced by most cancer patients, during and after treatments and also at the end of life. There is no accepted definition of CRF, because it is a multifaceted symptom that involves multiple biopsychosocial aspects. Several scales for assessing CRF have been used, unidimensional or multidimensional, but there is no agreement regarding the best instrument to measure CRF. Concerning the CRF treatment, pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions have been used. Pharmacologic therapies have been evaluated in few randomized clinical trials: corticosteroids demonstrated a superior efficacy to the placebo in terminal cancer patients; psychostimulants (methylfenidate, dexamphetamine, modafinil), antidepressant (paroxetine), acetilcholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil), l-carnitine and coenzyme Q(10) generally have reported negative results. Non-pharmacologic interventions (physical exercise, psychosocial interventions and other integrative interventions, such as yoga, ginseng, acupuncture) have been evaluated in several randomized and non-randomized studies, but with many methodological limitations. Therefore, the most effective non-pharmacological intervention remains unclear and the effect sizes are small. Further research is needed to delineate the optimal definition, measurement and treatment of CRF.