Browsing by Subject "Chemotherapy"
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Open Access Efficacy of Pharmacokinetics-Directed Busulfan, Cyclophosphamide, and Etoposide Conditioning and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Lymphoma: Comparison of a Multicenter Phase II Study and CIBMTR Outcomes.(Biol Blood Marrow Transplant, 2016-07) Flowers, Christopher R; Costa, Luciano J; Pasquini, Marcelo C; Le-Rademacher, Jennifer; Lill, Michael; Shore, Tsiporah B; Vaughan, William; Craig, Michael; Freytes, Cesar O; Shea, Thomas C; Horwitz, Mitchell E; Fay, Joseph W; Mineishi, Shin; Rondelli, Damiano; Mason, James; Braunschweig, Ira; Ai, Weiyun; Yeh, Rosa F; Rodriguez, Tulio E; Flinn, Ian; Comeau, Terrance; Yeager, Andrew M; Pulsipher, Michael A; Bence-Bruckler, Isabelle; Laneuville, Pierre; Bierman, Philip; Chen, Andy I; Kato, Kazunobu; Wang, Yanlin; Xu, Cong; Smith, Angela J; Waller, Edmund KBusulfan, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide (BuCyE) is a commonly used conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). This multicenter, phase II study examined the safety and efficacy of BuCyE with individually adjusted busulfan based on preconditioning pharmacokinetics. The study initially enrolled Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients ages 18 to 80 years but was amended due to high early treatment-related mortality (TRM) in patients > 65 years. BuCyE outcomes were compared with contemporaneous recipients of carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BEAM) from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. Two hundred seven subjects with HL (n = 66) or NHL (n = 141) were enrolled from 32 centers in North America, and 203 underwent ASCT. Day 100 TRM for all subjects (n = 203), patients > 65 years (n = 17), and patients ≤ 65 years (n = 186) were 4.5%, 23.5%, and 2.7%, respectively. The estimated rates of 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) were 33% for HL and 58%, 77%, and 43% for diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL; n = 63), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL; n = 29), and follicular lymphoma (FL; n = 23), respectively. The estimated rates of 2-year overall survival (OS) were 76% for HL and 65%, 89%, and 89% for DLBCL, MCL, and FL, respectively. In the matched analysis rates of 2-year TRM were 3.3% for BuCyE and 3.9% for BEAM, and there were no differences in outcomes for NHL. Patients with HL had lower rates of 2-year PFS with BuCyE, 33% (95% CI, 21% to 46%), than with BEAM, 59% (95% CI, 52% to 66%), with no differences in TRM or OS. BuCyE provided adequate disease control and safety in B cell NHL patients ≤ 65 years but produced worse PFS in HL patients when compared with BEAM.Item Open Access Multiple Co-occurring Symptoms in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancers(2021) Lin, YufenBackground: Patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers experience 10 to 15 co-occurring symptoms during chemotherapy that decrease their functional status, quality of life (QOL), and overall survival. The purposes of this dissertation were to describe symptom experiences and self-management strategies for multiple co-occurring symptoms in patients with gastric cancer; identify the subgroups of patients with GI cancers based on their distinct symptom experience profiles; and determine differences among these subgroups in demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as co-occurring symptoms and QOL outcomes.
Methods: An integrative review, a qualitative study, and three quantitative studies (i.e., one was cross-sectional, two were longitudinal) were used in this dissertation. Twenty-five studies were included and systematically evaluated in the review. Ten participants were interviewed for their symptom experiences and self-management strategies. Patients (n=405) completed questionnaires (e.g., the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale, the Lee fatigue Scale, the General Sleep Disturbance Scale) six times over two cycles of chemotherapy. Content analysis was used to analyze the qualitative data. Latent class/profile analysis was used to identify the subgroups of patients with distinct symptom profiles. Differences in demographic and clinical characteristics as well as co-occurring symptoms and QOL outcomes among the subgroups were evaluated using parametric and non-parametric analyses.
Results: The most common symptoms were categorized into physical and affective/cognitive domains. Patients reported a large amount of inter-individual variability and dynamic nature in their experiences of multiple co-occurring symptoms. Four symptom self-management strategies were identified: medications for symptoms, information-seeking from the clinician team, lifestyle modifications, and psychosocial and spiritual support. The risk factors for a higher symptom burden included younger age, not being married/partnered, being unemployed, having childcare responsibilities, lack of regular exercise, having a lower functional status, having a higher comorbidity burden, and self-reported diagnosis of depression. Patients with a more severe symptom profile reported higher levels of morning and evening fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depressive symptoms, and pain, as well as lower levels of attentional function and QOL scores at enrollment.
Conclusions and Implications: This dissertation is the first to identify the subgroups of patients with GI cancers with distinct symptom experience profiles and examine a number of risk factors associated with more severe symptom profiles, as well as describe symptom experiences and self-management strategies for multiple co-occurring symptoms in patients with gastric cancer. Additional research is warranted to explore underlying mechanisms that contribute to the development of multiple co-occurring symptoms during chemotherapy. Clinicians need to assess for common risk factors and associated co-occurring symptoms, as well as initiate personalized symptom management interventions and referrals.
Item Open Access Patient Burden and Real-World Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression: Results from an Online Survey of Patients with Solid Tumors.(Advances in therapy, 2020-08) Epstein, Robert S; Aapro, Matti S; Basu Roy, Upal K; Salimi, Tehseen; Krenitsky, JoAnn; Leone-Perkins, Megan L; Girman, Cynthia; Schlusser, Courtney; Crawford, JeffreyINTRODUCTION:Chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM) is one of the most common dose-limiting complications of cancer treatment, and is associated with a range of debilitating symptoms that can significantly impact patients' quality of life. The purpose of this study was to understand patients' perspectives on how the side effects of CIM are managed in routine clinical practice. METHODS:An online survey was conducted of participants with breast, lung, or colorectal cancer who had received chemotherapy treatment within the past 12 months, and had experienced at least one episode of myelosuppression in the past year. The survey was administered with predominantly close-ended questions, and lay definitions of key terms were provided to aid response selection. RESULTS:Of 301 participants who completed the online survey, 153 (51%) had breast cancer, 100 (33%) had lung cancer, and 48 (16%) had colorectal cancer. Anemia, neutropenia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia were reported by 61%, 59%, 37%, and 34% of participants, respectively. Most participants (79%) reported having received treatment for CIM, and 64% of participants recalled chemotherapy dose modifications as a result of CIM. Although most participants believed their oncologist was aware of the side effects of CIM, and treated them quickly, 30% of participants felt their oncologists did not understand how uncomfortable they were due to the side effects of CIM. Overall, 88% of participants considered CIM to have a moderate or major impact on their lives. CONCLUSION:The data highlight that despite the various methods used to address CIM, and the patient-focused approach of oncologists, the real-world impact of CIM on patients is substantial. Improving communication between patients and health care providers may help improve patients' understanding of CIM, and foster shared decision-making in terms of treatment. Additional insights from patients should be obtained to further elucidate the totality of life burden associated with CIM.Item Open Access Veterans health administration hepatitis B testing and treatment with anti-CD20 antibody administration.(World J Gastroenterol, 2016-05-21) Hunt, CMAIM: To evaluate pretreatment hepatitis B virus (HBV) testing, vaccination, and antiviral treatment rates in Veterans Affairs patients receiving anti-CD20 Ab for quality improvement. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using a national repository of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) electronic health record data. We identified all patients receiving anti-CD20 Ab treatment (2002-2014). We ascertained patient demographics, laboratory results, HBV vaccination status (from vaccination records), pharmacy data, and vital status. The high risk period for HBV reactivation is during anti-CD20 Ab treatment and 12 mo follow up. Therefore, we analyzed those who were followed to death or for at least 12 mo after completing anti-CD20 Ab. Pretreatment serologic tests were used to categorize chronic HBV (hepatitis B surface antigen positive or HBsAg+), past HBV (HBsAg-, hepatitis B core antibody positive or HBcAb+), resolved HBV (HBsAg-, HBcAb+, hepatitis B surface antibody positive or HBsAb+), likely prior vaccination (isolated HBsAb+), HBV negative (HBsAg-, HBcAb-), or unknown. Acute hepatitis B was defined by the appearance of HBsAg+ in the high risk period in patients who were pretreatment HBV negative. We assessed HBV antiviral treatment and the incidence of hepatitis, liver failure, and death during the high risk period. Cumulative hepatitis, liver failure, and death after anti-CD20 Ab initiation were compared by HBV disease categories and differences compared using the χ(2) test. Mean time to hepatitis peak alanine aminotransferase, liver failure, and death relative to anti-CD20 Ab administration and follow-up were also compared by HBV disease group. RESULTS: Among 19304 VHA patients who received anti-CD20 Ab, 10224 (53%) had pretreatment HBsAg testing during the study period, with 49% and 43% tested for HBsAg and HBcAb, respectively within 6 mo pretreatment in 2014. Of those tested, 2% (167/10224) had chronic HBV, 4% (326/7903) past HBV, 5% (427/8110) resolved HBV, 8% (628/8110) likely prior HBV vaccination, and 76% (6022/7903) were HBV negative. In those with chronic HBV infection, ≤ 37% received HBV antiviral treatment during the high risk period while 21% to 23% of those with past or resolved HBV, respectively, received HBV antiviral treatment. During and 12 mo after anti-CD20 Ab, the rate of hepatitis was significantly greater in those HBV positive vs negative (P = 0.001). The mortality rate was 35%-40% in chronic or past hepatitis B and 26%-31% in hepatitis B negative. In those pretreatment HBV negative, 16 (0.3%) developed acute hepatitis B of 4947 tested during anti-CD20Ab treatment and follow-up. CONCLUSION: While HBV testing of Veterans has increased prior to anti-CD20 Ab, few HBV+ patients received HBV antivirals, suggesting electronic health record algorithms may enhance health outcomes.