ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We evaluated the role of residual vein thrombosis (RVT) to assess the optimal duration of anticoagulants in patients with cancer who have deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower limbs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with active cancer and a first episode of DVT treated with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for 6 months were eligible. Patients were managed according to RVT findings: those with RVT were randomly assigned to continue LMWH for an additional 6 months (group A1) or to discontinue it (group A2), and patients without RVT stopped LMWH (group B). The primary end point was recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) during the 1 year after disconinuation of LMWH, and the secondary end point was major bleeding. Analyses are from the time of random assignment. RESULTS: Between October 2005 and April 2010, 347 patients were enrolled. RVT was detected in 242 patients (69.7%); recurrence occurred in 22 of the 119 patients in group A1compared with 27 of 123 patients in group A2. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for group A2 versus A1 was 1.37 (95% CI, 0.7 to 2.5; P = .311). Three of the 105 patients in group B developed recurrent VTE; adjusted HR for group A1 versus B was 6.0 (95% CI, 1.7 to 21.2; P = .005). Three major bleeding events occurred in group A1, and two events each occurred in groups A2 and B. The HR for major bleeding in group A1 versus group A2 was 3.78 (95% CI, 0.77 to 18.58; P = .102). Overall, 42 patients (12.1%) died during follow-up as a result of cancer progression. CONCLUSION: In patients with cancer with a first DVT, treated for 6 months with LMWH, absence of RVT identifies a population at low risk for recurrent thrombotic events. Continuation of LMWH in patients with RVT up to 1 year did not reduce recurrent VTE.
Subject(s)
Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Neoplasms/complications , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Venous Thrombosis/drug therapy , Aged , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Disease Progression , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Lower Extremity/blood supply , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Recurrence , Risk Factors , Survival Rate , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Venous Thromboembolism/complications , Venous Thromboembolism/mortality , Venous Thrombosis/complicationsSubject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents/adverse effects , Diphosphonates/adverse effects , Imidazoles/adverse effects , Multiple Myeloma/genetics , Osteonecrosis/genetics , PPAR gamma/genetics , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Case-Control Studies , Gene Frequency , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Jaw Diseases/genetics , Middle Aged , Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide , Zoledronic AcidABSTRACT
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.
