Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Cancer Patients. Time for a Change in Paradigm.

Thrombosis is a more common occurrence in cancer patients compared to the general population and is one of the main causes of death in these patients. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has been the recognized standard treatment for more than a decade, both in cancer-related thrombosis and in its prevention. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are a new option for anticoagulation therapy. Recently published results of large randomized clinical trials have confirmed that DOAC may be a reasonable alternative to LMWH in cancer patients. The following review summarizes the current evidence on the safety and efficacy of DOAC in the treatment and prevention of cancer-related thrombosis. It also draws attention to the limitations of this group of drugs, knowledge of which will facilitate the selection of optimal therapy.

It is not just the drugs that matter: the nocebo effect.

The role of psychological mechanisms in the treatment process cannot be underestimated, the well-known placebo effect unquestionably being a factor in treatment. However, there is also a dark side to the impact of mental processes on health/illness as exemplified by the nocebo effect. This phenomenon includes the emergence or exacerbation of negative symptoms associated with the therapy, but arising as a result of the patient's expectations, rather than being an actual complication of treatment. The exact biological mechanisms of this process are not known, but cholecystokinergic and dopaminergic systems, changes in the HPA axis, and the endogenous secretion of opioids are thought to be involved. The nocebo effect can affect a significant proportion of people undergoing treatment, including cancer patients, leading in some cases to the cessation of potentially effective therapy, because of adverse effects that are not actually part of the biological effect of treatment. In extreme cases, as a result of suggestions and expectations, a paradoxical effect, biologically opposite to the mechanism of the action of the drug, may occur. In addition, the nocebo effect may significantly interfere with the results of clinical trials, being the cause of a significant proportion of complications reported. Knowledge of the phenomenon is thus necessary in order to facilitate its minimalization and thus improve the quality of life of patients and the effectiveness of treatment.

Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor Receptor, Tissue Factor, and VEGF-R Bound VEGF in Human Breast Cancer In Loco.

BACKGROUND: Doxorubicin and docetaxel-based chemotherapy regimens used in breast cancer patients are associated with high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) are recommended for both treating and preventing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Increased thrombosis incidence in G-CSF treated patients was reported; however, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. The principal activator of blood coagulation in cancer is tissue factor (TF). It additionally contributes to cancer progression and stimulates angiogenesis. The main proangiogenic factor is vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate granulocyte-colony stimulating factor receptor (G-CSFR), tissue factor (TF) expression and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGF-R) bound VEGF in human breast cancer in loco. MATERIAL AND METHODS: G-CSFR, TF and VEGFR bound VEGF (VEGF: VEGFR) were assessed in 28 breast cancer tissue samples. Immunohistochemical (IHC) methodologies according to ABC technique and double staining IHC procedure were employed utilizing antibodies against G-CSFR, TF and VEGF associated with VEGFR (VEGF: VEGFR). RESULTS: Expression of G-CSFR was demonstrated in 20 breast cancer tissue specimens (71%). In 6 cases (21%) the expression was strong (IRS 9-12). Strong expression of TF was observed in all investigated cases (100%). Moreover, expression of VEGF: VEGFR was visualized in cancer cells (IRS 5-8). No presence of G-CSFR, TF or VEGF: VEGFR was detected on healthy breast cells. Double staining IHC studies revealed co-localization of G-CSFR and TF, G-CSFR and VEGF: VEGFR, as well as TF and VEGF: VEGFR on breast cancer cells and ECs. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study indicate that GCSFR, TF and VEGF: VEGFR expression as well as their co-expression might influence breast cancer biology, and may increase thromboembolic adverse events incidence.

Pain management during radiotherapy and radiochemotherapy in oropharyngeal cancer patients: single-institution experience.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Radiotherapy (RT) is a radical therapeutic option for patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). It induces an acute postradiation reaction that may cause significant pain. The aim of this study was to analyse pain occurrence and intensity, as well as type and effectiveness of analgesic treatment, in OPC patients undergoing RT or radiochemotherapy (RT-CT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective data were obtained for 42 OPC patients at clinical stages I-IVA, treated with adjuvant RT or RT-CT or definite RT or RT-CcT at the Comprehensive Cancer Center in Bialystok, Poland. Pain intensity and type of analgesic treatment during the therapy were analysed and compared with the intensity of the radiation-induced acute reaction, assessed weekly according to the Dische score. RESULTS: Thirty-nine (92.9%) patients received analgesic treatment. Analgesic therapy was started in 27 (64.3%) patients with administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and/or paracetamol, in seven (16.7%) with mild opioids and in five (11.9%) with strong opioids. Strong opioids were used during therapy in 21 (50%) patients. Co-analgesics were administered to six patients. Breakthrough pain was observed in 10 (23.8%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: High incidence of pain during RT and RT-CT calls for increased awareness of the importance of pain monitoring and treatment during RT of OPC patients. The analgesic treatment had to be adjusted individually.