METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted in Penang General Hospital on 534 anemic solid cancer patients who were admitted between 2003 and 2009. The main statistical tests used were Chi-square test and Logistic regression test for categorical data. While for continues data the main statistical tests were Linear regression and correlation test. The significance of the result will be when the P<0.05, while the confidence interval for this study was 95%.
RESULTS: FEC, 5-FU+5-FU, Docetaxel and Cisplatin+ 5-FU regimen has strong association and correlation with anemia onset and severity. However the associations and correlations with anemia severity were stronger than those with the onset. Different doses of 5-FU, cyclophosphamide, docetaxel and cisplatin play a critical role in anemia onset and severity.
CONCLUSION: Monitoring and determination of hemoglobin levels for cancer patients treated with FEC, 5-FU+5-FU, Docetaxel, Cisplatin+ 5-FU specifically with high doses must be emphasized and a focus of particular attention.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with GCTs and treated with at least two cycles of BEP chemotherapy between January 2003 and Oct 2009 were eligible for this study. Patients received 4-6 cycles of bleomycin 30,000IU IV D1, D8 and D15 and either etoposide 100mg/m2 IV D1- D5 and cisplatin 20mg/m2 IV D1- D5 (5 day BEP regimen) or etoposide 165 mg/m2 D1- D3 and cisplatin 50mg/m2 D1-3 (3 day BEP regimen) every three weeks per cycle. All patients received prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) from days 6 to 10 of each cycle. The overall response rates, 2 year progression-free survival and overall survival of the whole cohort were assessed.
RESULTS: Thirty patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Non-seminomatous GCTs comprised 93.3% of cases and gonadal and mediastinal primary sites were the most common. Sixty percent were classified as IGCCCG poor risk disease. Median follow-up was 26.6 months. The overall response rate (CR+PR) was 70%. The two year PFS and OS were 70% and 66%. There was a significant difference in terms of the overall response rate (85% vs 40%, p = 0.03) and in PFS (94.7% vs 50%, p = 0.003) between gonadal and extragonadal primary sites.
CONCLUSION: It is possible to achieve outcomes similar to those in international clinical trials with close monitoring and good supportive care of patients undergoing BEP chemotherapy. There is a strong argument for patients with IGCCCG poor prognosis disease to be treated in specialist tertiary centres to optimize treatment outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study looked at patients who had palliative chemotherapy with either cisplatin/5FU or carboplatin/5FU for metastatic and recurrent SCCHN and NPC. It included patients who were treated at UKMMC from 1st January 2004 to 31st December 2009 with either palliative IV cispaltin 75 mg/m2 D1 only plus IV 5FU 750 mg/m2 D1-5 infusion or IV Carboplatin AUC 5 D1 only plus IV 5FU 500 mg/m2 D1-2 infusion plus IV 5FU 500 mg/m2 D1-2 bolus. The specific objectives were to determine the efficacy of palliative chemotherapy in terms of overall response rate (ORR), median progression free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) and to evaluate the toxicities of both regimens.
RESULTS: A total of 41 patients were eligible for this study. There were 17 in the cisplatin/5FU arm and 24 in the carboplatin/5FU arm. The ORR was 17.7 % for cisplatin/5FU arm and 37.5 % for carboplatin/5FU arm (p-value=0.304). The median PFS was 7 months for cisplatin/5FU and 9 months for carboplatin/5FU (p-value=1.015). The median OS was 10 months for cisplatin/5FU arm and 12 months for carboplatin/5FU arm (p-value=0.110). There were 6 treatment-related deaths (6/41=14.6%), four in the carboplatin/5FU arm (4/24=16.7%) and 2 in the cisplatin/5FU arm (2/17=11.8%). Grade 3 and 4 hematologic toxicity was also more common with carboplatin/5FU group, this difference being predominantly due to grade 3-4 granulocytopenia (41.6% vs. 0), grade 3-4 anemia (37.5% vs. 0) and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (16.6% vs. 0).
CONCLUSIONS: Carboplatin/5FU is not inferior to cisplatin/5FU with regard to its efficacy. However, there was a high rate of treatment-related deaths with both regimens. A better alternative needs to be considered.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two EGFR mutation tests, a tissue-based assay (cobas® v1) and a tissue- and blood-based assay (cobas® v2) were used to analyze matched biopsy and blood samples (897 paired samples) from three Asian studies of first-line erlotinib with similar intent-to-treat populations. ENSURE was a phase III comparison of erlotinib and gemcitabine/platinum, FASTACT-2 was a phase III study of gemcitabine/platinum plus erlotinib or placebo, and ASPIRATION was a single-arm phase II study of erlotinib. Agreement statistics were evaluated, based on sensitivity and specificity between the two assays in subgroups of patients with increasing tumor burden.
RESULTS: Patients with discordant EGFR (tissue+/plasma-) mutation status achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with concordant (tissue+/plasma+) mutation status. Tumor burden was significantly greater in patients with concordant versus discordant mutations. Pooled analyses of data from the three studies showed a sensitivity of 72.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67.8-76.1) and a specificity of 97.9% (95% CI 96.0-99.0) for blood-based testing; sensitivity was greatest in patients with larger baseline tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based EGFR mutation testing demonstrated high specificity and good sensitivity, and offers a convenient and easily accessible diagnostic method to complement tissue-based tests. Patients with a discordant mutation status in plasma and tissue, had improved survival outcomes compared with those with a concordant mutation status, which may be due to their lower tumor burden. These data help to inform the clinical utility of this blood-based assay for the detection of EGFR mutations.