The oncologist
-
Multicenter Study
Surprise Questions for Survival Prediction in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.
Predicting the short-term survival in cancer patients is an important issue for patients, family, and oncologists. Although the prognostic accuracy of the surprise question has value in 1-year mortality for cancer patients, the prognostic value for short-term survival has not been formally assessed. The primary aim of the present study was to assess the prognostic value of the surprise question for 7-day and 30-day survival in patients with advanced cancer. ⋯ The findings of this study indicate that clinicians can screen patients for 7- or 30-day survival using surprise questions with 90% or more sensitivity. Clinicians cannot provide accurate prognosis estimation, and all patients will not always die within the defined periods. The screened patients can be regarded as the subjects to be prepared for approaching death, and proactive discussion would be useful for such patients.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
The Hand-Foot Skin Reaction and Quality of Life Questionnaire: An Assessment Tool for Oncology.
Skin toxicity (hand-foot syndrome/hand-foot skin reaction, HFS/R) related to antineoplastic therapy is a significant issue in oncology practice, with potentially large impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQL). ⋯ Skin toxicity related to anticancer therapies is a significant issue in oncology practice. Several newer agents, as well as older therapies, are associated with the skin toxicity known as hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) or hand-foot syndrome (HFS). This study describes the development and validation of a brief, patient-reported questionnaire (the hand-foot skin reaction and quality of life questionnaire) supporting its suitability for use in clinical research to aid in early recognition of symptoms, to evaluate the effectiveness of agents for HFS/R treatment within clinical trials, and to evaluate the impact of these treatments on HFS/R-associated patients' health-related quality of life.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Adjusting for the Confounding Effects of Treatment Switching-The BREAK-3 Trial: Dabrafenib Versus Dacarbazine.
Patients with previously untreated BRAF V600E mutation-positive melanoma in BREAK-3 showed a median overall survival (OS) of 18.2 months for dabrafenib versus 15.6 months for dacarbazine (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-1.21). Because patients receiving dacarbazine were allowed to switch to dabrafenib at disease progression, we attempted to adjust for the confounding effects on OS. ⋯ Treatment switching is common in oncology trials, and the implications of this for the interpretation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the novel treatment are important to consider. If patients who switch treatments benefit from the experimental treatment and a standard intention-to-treat analysis is conducted, the overall survival advantage associated with the new treatment could be underestimated. The present study applied established statistical methods to adjust for treatment switching in a trial that compared dabrafenib and dacarbazine for metastatic melanoma. The results showed that this led to a substantially increased estimate of the overall survival treatment effect associated with dabrafenib.
-
Traditional treatment modalities for advanced cancer (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or targeted agents) act directly on tumors to inhibit or destroy them. Along with surgery, these modalities are predominantly palliative, with toxicity and only modest improvements in survival in patients with advanced solid tumors. Accordingly, long-term survival rates for most patients with advanced cancer remain low, thus there is a need for cancer treatments with favorable benefit and toxicity profiles that can potentially result in long-term survival. The immune system plays a critical role in the recognition and eradication of tumor cells ("immune surveillance"), and immunotherapies based on this concept have been used for decades with some success against a few tumor types; however, most immunotherapies were limited by a lack of either substantial efficacy or specificity, resulting in toxicity. We now have a greater understanding of the complex interactions between the immune system and tumors and have identified key molecules that govern these interactions. This information has revitalized the interest in immunotherapy as an evolving treatment modality using immunotherapeutics designed to overcome the mechanisms exploited by tumors to evade immune destruction. Immunotherapies have potentially complementary mechanisms of action that may allow them to be combined with other immunotherapeutics, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or other traditional therapies. This review discusses the concepts and data behind immunotherapies, with a focus on the checkpoint inhibitors and their responses, toxicities, and potential for long-term survival, and explores promising single-agent and combination therapies in development. ⋯ Immunotherapy is an evolving treatment approach based on the role of the immune system in eradicating cancer. An example of an immunotherapeutic is ipilimumab, an antibody that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) to augment antitumor immune responses. Ipilimumab is approved for advanced melanoma and induced long-term survival in a proportion of patients. The programmed death-1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitors are promising immunotherapies with demonstrated sustained antitumor responses in several tumors. Because they harness the patient's own immune system, immunotherapies have the potential to be a powerful weapon against cancer.
-
Clinical Trial
Chemotherapy Alone for Patients With Stage II/III Rectal Cancer Undergoing Radical Surgery.
The purpose of this prospective pilot study was to determine the efficacy of preoperative chemotherapy with six cycles of FOLFOX 6 (without radiation therapy) followed by radical surgery followed by six additional cycles of FOLFOX 6 for patients with stage II/III rectal cancer. ⋯ Neoadjuvant radiotherapy of rectal cancer represents the current standard of care. However, its use is also associated with short-term toxicity and long-term morbidity. With the increasing use of total mesorectal resection resulting in better local control and advances in systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, this study highlights the question of whether radiation is a necessary component of neoadjuvant therapy for all patients with rectal cancer or whether select patients could be spared the additional toxicities and inconvenience of radiotherapy. This study suggests that neoadjuvant FOLFOX without radiotherapy is active and safe, but it could not be considered a standard of care till now.