[Value-based cancer care. From traditional evidence-based decision making to balanced decision making within frameworks of shared values]. / La decisione oncologica basata sui valori Dal tradizionale processo decisionale oncologico evidence-based a scelte basate su valori bilanciati e condivisi.

Clinical decision making in oncology is based so far on the evidence of efficacy from high-quality clinical research. Data collection and analysis from experimental studies provide valuable insight into response rates and progression-free or overall survival. Data processing generates valuable information for medical professionals involved in cancer patient care, enabling them to make objective and unbiased choices. The increased attention of many scientific associations toward a more rational resource consumption in clinical decision making is mirrored in the Choosing Wisely campaign against the overuse or misuse of exams and procedures of little or no benefit for the patient. This cultural movement has been actively promoting care solutions based on the concept of "value". As a result, the value-based decision-making process for cancer care should not be dissociated from economic sustainability and from ethics of the affordability, also given the growing average cost of the most recent cancer drugs. In support of this orientation, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has developed innovative and "complex" guidelines based on values, defined as "evidence blocks", with the aim of assisting the medical community in making overall sustainable choices.

Advanced adult esthesioneuroblastoma successfully treated with cisplatin and etoposide alternated with doxorubicin, ifosfamide and vincristine.

The esthesioneuroblastoma is a rare neuroendocrine tumor that derives from the olfactory cells. In the last 20 years, around 1,000 cases have been described, with an overall survival rate of 60-70% at 5 years. The most common symptoms are nasal bleeding, nasal clogging and, in locally advanced cases, signs/symptoms of intracranic hypertension such as papilla edema, cefalea, and vomiting. The standard treatments are surgery and radiotherapy. Chemotherapy can be used in an adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting and in the metastatic phase, even if its role is still not established with certainty. Here, the case is reported of a young man (38 years old) with a locally advanced esthesioneuroblastoma. Two months before coming to our clinic, he had been treated elsewhere with debulking surgery through bilateral frontal craniotomy. After surgery, MRI showed residual disease in the nasal cavities and in the medial wall of the orbits responsible for blindness and bilateral exophthalmos within a month: a very short time. Octreoscan and whole body CT scan confirmed a locally advanced disease, in the absence of metastases. Chemotherapy was begun with cisplatin and etoposide alternated with doxorubicin, ifosfamide and vincristine with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support after every cycle. Soon after the first cycle, an important reduction of pain and decrease of the exophthalmos and vertigos was observed. No improvement in blindness was seen. The patient is still stable after 24 months of follow up.

Preferences of patients with advanced colorectal cancer for treatment with oral or intravenous chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, patient-reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life have become important areas of clinician focus in general cancer management. Patients' preferences for, and/or satisfaction with, oral versus intravenous (IV) chemotherapy schedules may have a major impact on such outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate preferences for oral or IV chemotherapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, crossover trial was conducted in 12 hospitals in Southern Italy, in which 22 patients with advanced colorectal cancer received one cycle of oral capecitabine ± irinotecan or oxaliplatin, followed by one cycle of an IV de Gramont or similar regimen (arm A), or the same regimens in reverse order (arm B). Patients were aged 50-70 years and 21% had a higher level of education (graduate or similar). Patients received oral capecitabine 3500 mg/m/day for 7 days (± irinotecan 180 mg/m or oxaliplatin 85 mg/m on day 1 only), followed by an IV de Gramont regimen ± irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin (FOLFOX); or the two schedules administered in reverse order.The main outcome measure was patients' preferences for oral versus IV chemotherapy, as determined by a pre- and post-treatment therapy preference questionnaire (TPQ). RESULTS: Before treatment, 75% of patients preferred oral therapy. Characteristics that patients considered to be important were that treatment should not interfere with daily activities (100% of patients) and should not cause fatigue (95%), diarrhea (76%), or painful mouth ulcers (76%); other factors considered important were the risk of infection and nausea (90%), and that treatment could be administered at home (65%). After receiving both chemotherapy schedules, only 45% of patients preferred oral therapy, while 55% preferred IV therapy. Among the latter, the most important characteristics influencing treatment choice were less nausea (66%), fewer mood effects (65%), the safety of hospital IV treatment (62%), less interference with family relationships (55%), less vomiting (55%), less interference with daily activities (50%), and less diarrhea (50%). Although the order in which patients received therapy did not influence treatment preference, significantly fewer patients with a lower rather than higher educational level preferred oral therapy (47% vs 80%; chi-square test = 9.9; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that there may be a correlation between educational level and the preference of patients with advanced colorectal cancer for oral or IV chemotherapy.