MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the clinical notes of all patients prescribed with oral capecitabine chemotherapy for any tumour sites in University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) from 1st January 2009 till 31st June 2010. Information collected included patient demographics, histopathological features, treatment received including the different chemotherapy regimens and intent of treatment whether the chemotherapy was given for neoadjuvant, concurrent with radiation, adjuvant or palliative intent. The aim of this study is to establish the pattern of usage, FN and TRD rates with capecitabine in clinical practice outside of clinical trial setting. FN is defined as an oral temperature >38.5°or two consecutive readings of >38.0° for 2 hours and an absolute neutrophil count <0.5 x 109/L, or expected to fall below 0.5 x 109/L (de Naurois et al., 2010). Treatment related death was defined as death occurring during or within 30 days of last chemotherapy treatment.
RESULTS: Between 1st January 2009 and 30th June 2010, 274 patients were treated with capecitabine chemotherapy in UMMC. The mean age was 58 years (range 22 to 82 years). Capecitabine was used in 14 different tumour sites with the colorectal site predominating with a total of 128 cases (46.7%), followed by breast cancer (35.8%). Capecitabine was most commonly used in the palliative setting accounting for 63.9% of the cases, followed by the adjuvant setting (19.7%). The most common regimen was single agent capecitabine with 129 cases (47.1%). The other common regimens were XELOX (21.5%) and ECX (10.2%). The main result of this study showed an overall FN rate of 2.2% (6/274). The overall TRD rate was 5.1% (14/274). The FN rate for the single agent capecitabine regimen was 1.6% (2/129) and the TRD rate was 5.4% (7/129). All the TRDs were with single agent capecitabine regimen were used for palliative intent.
CONCLUSIONS: Oral capecitabine is used widely in clinical practice in a myriad of tumour sites and bears a low risk of febrile neutropaenia. However, capecitabine like any other intravenous chemotherapeutic agent carries a significant risk of treatment related death.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who were treated with first line palliative chemotherapy for de novo MBC from 2002-2011 in UMMC were identified from the UMMC Breast Cancer Registry. Information collected included patient demographics, histopathological features, treatment received, including the different chemotherapy regimens, and presence of FN and TRD. FN was defined as an oral temperature >38.5° or two consecutive readings of >38.0° for 2 hours and an absolute neutrophil count <0.5x109/L, or expected to fall below 0.5x109/L (de Naurois et al, 2010). TRD was defined as death occurring during or within 30 days of the last chemotherapy treatment, as a consequence of the chemotherapy treatment. Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS version 18.0 software. Survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and differences in survival compared using log-rank test.
RESULTS: Between 1st January 2002 and 31st December 2011, 424 patients with MBC were treated in UMMC. A total of 186 out of 221 patients with de novo MBC who received first line palliative chemotherapy were analyzed. The mean age of patients in this study was 49.5 years (range 24 to 74 years). Biologically, ER status was negative in 54.4% of patients and Her-2 status was positive in 31.1%. A 5-flourouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (FEC) chemotherapy regimen was chosen for 86.6% of the cases. Most patients had multiple metastatic sites (58.6%). The main result of this study showed a FN rate of 5.9% and TRD rate of 3.2%. The median survival (MS) for the entire cohort was 19 months. For those with multiple metastatic sites, liver only, lung only, bone only and brain only metastatic sites, the MS was 18, 24, 19, 24 and 8 months respectively (p-value= 0.319).
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, we surmise that FEC is a safe regimen with acceptable FN and TRD rates for de novo MBC.
METHODOLOGY: One hundred and ninety-one episodes of fever and neutropenia in 128 patients from October 1997 to December 1998 were included in a prospective, open-label, single-centre study. Patients were randomly assigned to either treatment group and evaluated as successes or failures according to defined criteria. Daily assessments were made on all patients and all adverse events recorded. Univariate and multivariate analysis of outcomes and a cost analysis were carried out.
RESULTS: There were 176 evaluable patient-episodes with 51.1% in the single-daily ceftriaxone-amikacin group and 48.9% in the ceftazidime-amikacin group. There were 50 positive blood cultures: 12 Gram-positive bacteria, 33 Gram-negative bacteria and five fungi. Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) accounted for 14% of total isolates. The overall success rate was 55.5% in the ceftriaxone group compared to 51.2% in the ceftazidime group (P = 0.56). Mean time to defervescence was 4.2 days in the single-daily group and 4.3 days in the thrice-daily group. There were nine infection-related deaths; five in the single-daily ceftriaxone group. The daily cost of the once-daily regime was 42 Malaysian Ringgit less than the thrice-daily regime. There was a low incidence of adverse effects in both groups, although ototoxicity was not evaluable.
CONCLUSIONS: The once-daily regime of ceftriaxone plus amikacin was as effective as the 'standard' combination of thrice-daily ceftazidime and amikacin with no significant adverse effects in either group. The convenience and substantial cost benefit of the once-daily regime will be particularly useful in developing countries with limited health resources and in centres with a low prevalence of P. aeruginosa.