RESUMEN
Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN) is a major side effect of several antineoplastic drugs. However, despite its clinical importance, there is no agreement as to the best way to assess the severity and changes in CIPN. We have previously demonstrated a correlation between the severity of CIPN, assessed using the Total Neuropathy Score (TNS) or its reduced versions, and several common toxicity scales. In this study, we investigated two series of patients (total number = 173) who were evaluated at baseline and during chemotherapy with the TNS (n= 122) or the TNSc (the TNS version based exclusively on the clinical evaluation of the patients, n= 51) and with the National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) 2.0, with the aim of comparing the sensitivity to the changes in CIPN severity. In both series, the TNS and the TNSc had a significant correlation with the NCI-CTC in scoring the severity of CIPN, confirming the results of previous studies. Moreover, both the TNS and the TNSc showed a higher sensitivity to CIPN changes. We, therefore, propose the TNSc as a reliable method for assessing not only the severity but also the changes in CIPN.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Enfermedades del Sistema Nervioso Periférico/inducido químicamente , Enfermedades del Sistema Nervioso Periférico/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neuronas Motoras/patología , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/patología , Examen Neurológico , Enfermedades del Sistema Nervioso Periférico/diagnóstico , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
The aim of this multi-center study was to assess with reduced versions of the Total Neuropathy Score (TNS), the severity of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN), and to compare the results with those obtained with common toxicity scales. An unselected population of 428 cancer patients was evaluated at 11 different centers using a composite (clinical + neurophysiological, TNSr) or clinical (TNSc) examination and with the National Cancer Institute - Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) 2.0 and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores. A highly significant correlation was demonstrated between the TNSr and the NCI-CTC 2.0 and ECOG scores; but the TNSr evaluation was more accurate in view of the more extended score range. Also, the simpler and faster TNSc (based only on the clinical neurological examination) allowed to grade accurately CIPN and correlated with the common toxicity scores. The correlation tended to be closer when the sensory items were considered, but also the TNSr motor items, which were not specifically investigated in any other previous study, significantly correlated with the results of the common toxicity scales. In conclusion, this study suggests that the TNSr is a reliable tool for accurately grading and reporting CIPN, with the additional and so far unique support of a formal comparison with known and widely used common toxicity scales. The TNSc is a valid alternative if neurophysiological examination is not feasible. The longer time needed to calculate the TNSr and TNSc in comparison to the ECOG or the NCI-CTC 2.0 scales is offset by the more detailed knowledge of the CIPN characteristics.