RESUMO
In this paper, we review the current state of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) management. BTcP is a heterogeneous condition and a global problem for cancer patients. It is often managed suboptimally, which results in a negative outcome for patients, healthcare providers, and healthcare systems. Several barriers to the appropriate management of BTcP have been identified. These include, among others, an incomplete definition of BTcP, poor training of healthcare providers and patients alike, a lack of a multidisciplinary approach and the absence of specific protocols and tools. We provide some actions to help physicians and patients improve their approach to BTcP, including specific training, the design of easy-to-use tools for BTcP identification and assessment (such as checklists and pocket-sized cards), individualized treatment, and the use of multidisciplinary teams.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Dor Irruptiva/tratamento farmacológico , Dor do Câncer/tratamento farmacológico , Fentanila/administração & dosagem , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Algoritmos , Dor Irruptiva/diagnóstico , Dor Irruptiva/etiologia , Dor do Câncer/diagnóstico , Dor do Câncer/etiologia , Comunicação , Humanos , Oncologistas/educação , Manejo da Dor/psicologia , Medição da Dor/métodos , Relações Médico-Paciente , Guias de Prática Clínica como AssuntoRESUMO
AIMS: To prove if there is clinical inertia in the identification and treatment of episodes of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP), comparing actual results from clinical practice with clinical oncologists' prior perception. DESIGN: Observational and descriptive study, using information collected by practising medical oncologists, at three moments: (a) questionnaire regarding their professional judgement of the handling of patients with BTcP in their practice, (b) cross-sectional clinical screening, to detect possible existing cases of BTcP in a representative sample of their patients, (c) retrospective self-audit of clinical case histories of patients diagnosed with BTcP to find out about how it has been handled. PARTICIPANTS AND STUDY PERIOD: A random sample on a state level of 108 specialists in medical oncology. 540 patients who suffer some type of cancer pain on the designated study date for each specialist (July-December 2016). RESULTS: The global prevalence of BTcP in the study sample covered 91.3% of the patients who were suffering some type of cancer pain. Barely 2% of the doctors surveyed suspected figures around this mark. 40.9% of the cases had not been previously detected as BTcP by their doctors. Although 90% of the patients who had previously been diagnosed with BTcP received a specific analgesic treatment for the symptoms, 42% of those patients with known BTcP were not able to control their episodes of pain. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical inertia is a serious problem in the handling of BTcP in medical oncology services, where it is the subject of a significantly low level of detection and treatment, despite the contrasting perception of specialists.
Assuntos
Dor Irruptiva/diagnóstico , Dor Irruptiva/epidemiologia , Dor do Câncer/diagnóstico , Dor do Câncer/epidemiologia , Oncologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Dor do Câncer/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prevalência , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
PURPOSE: After surgical resection, an ample prognosis variability among stages is observed. Multiple prognostic factors are individually studied and some CRC classifiers have been proposed. Not one have been implemented into clinical practice. METHODS/PATIENTS: We classified 105 patients with resected CRC (stage I-III) into five molecular subtypes using BRAFV600E and RAS (KRAS; NRAS) status, and the expression of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) proteins (MLH1 and MSH2). Clinicopathological features and DFS) of distincts groups were evaluated. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: RAS and BRAFV600E mutations were detected in 43.8 and 11.4% of patients, respectively. 19% of tumours had lack of expression of any MMR proteins reflecting a system deficiency (dMMR). Patients with any RAS mutation had lower DFS that patients with RAS wild type (wt) (40.23 vs 45.26 months; p value = 0.035). Of a total of five molecular subtypes, three were MMR proficient (pMMR): RAS mutated (39%), BRAFV600E mutated (6.7%) and RAS/BRAFV600E wt (35.2%); and two were dMMR: BRAFV600E mutated (4.8%) and BRAFV600E wt (14.3%). Left side tumours were more frequently observed in pMMR/RAS and BRAFV600E wt subtype, and right side tumours in dMMR subtypes. Among the three pMMR subtypes, a benefit survival was observed for patients without any mutation in BRAFv600E or RAS oncogenes (median of DFS = 45.5 vs 40.98 months in RAS mutated group; p = 0.084 and vs 34.13 in BRAFv600E mutated group; p = 0.031). Molecular classification using these biomarkers can be useful to identify groups with differences in prognosis.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico , Adenocarcinoma/genética , Biomarcadores Tumorais/genética , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorretais/genética , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Adenocarcinoma/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/terapia , Reparo de Erro de Pareamento de DNA/genética , Feminino , Genes ras , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular , Mutação , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Prognóstico , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/genética , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
PURPOSE: Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) has been shown to be a prevalent and poor prognostic factor for oncologic patients, which remain under diagnosed and undertreated. In 2012, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for the treatment of cancer pain which specifically addressed the management of BTcP. METHODS: Fundación ECO designed a qualitative study using an Internet-based survey to investigate the attitudes toward, compliance with, and use of SEOM Guideline. RESULTS: A total of 83 oncologists with a mean experience of 13 years responded. Overall, 82% were aware of different guidelines to manage BTcP. Notably, attitudes toward guidelines were highly positive and there was nearly unanimous agreement that CPG provided the best scientific evidence available (99%), on the minimum information to be gathered for the medical history (100%), on the need for a specific treatment for BTcP (100%), and fentanyl as the first-choice drug (99%). Interestingly, there were discrepancies between what oncologists agreed with and what they do in clinical practice. In fact, 87.6% declare full compliance with SEOM guideline, although adherence to registration of BTcP data in medical records ranged from 30.1 to 91.6% (mean 64.5%); therapeutic management compliance was higher ranging from 75.9 to 91.6%. Main barriers identified were time pressure together with vague statements and limited dissemination of the guidelines. CONCLUSION: Despite oncologist's clinical practice is increasingly guided by GPC, it suffers from limited compliance, at least in part due to suboptimal statements. Improved dissemination and education are needed to enhance guideline implementation.
Assuntos
Dor Irruptiva/tratamento farmacológico , Dor do Câncer/tratamento farmacológico , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Oncologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Oncologistas , Espanha , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
PURPOSE: To analyse the prognostic role of the immunohistochemical expression of pKDR in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidines combination chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. METHODS: Retrospective multicentre study, carried out at four hospitals in the Valencian Community (Spain). Patients evolution was compared based on the immunohistochemical expression of pKDR, classified using 4 categories: 0 (undetectable), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate) and 3 (high intensity). Patients were divided into two groups for the analysis: group 1 with low expression (0-1) vs. group 2 with high expression (2-3). RESULTS: Histological samples for the pKDR analysis were available for 84 of the 112 patients selected. Seven (8.3 %) had undetectable or mild expression of pKDR (Group 1) and 77 (91.7 %) showed moderate or high expression of pKDR (Group 2). Response rate in Group 1 was 100 % compared to 54.2 % in Group 2 (p = 0.019). Progression-free survival (PFS) (15 vs. 12 months, p = 0.4) and overall survival (OS) (28 vs. 22 months, p = 0.09) were numerically but not significantly higher in patients from Group 1 vs. Group 2. Patients from Group 2 who received bevacizumab presented a significantly higher PFS (13 vs. 11, p = 0.015) and a numerically higher OS (23 vs. 17 months, p = 0.27) than those treated exclusively with chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the absence or low expression of pKDR is associated with a better prognostic profile in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy and bevacizumab. Patients with a high pKDR expression benefit from the combination of chemotherapy with bevacizumab.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Biomarcadores Tumorais/metabolismo , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundário , Receptor 2 de Fatores de Crescimento do Endotélio Vascular/metabolismo , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Bevacizumab/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorretais/metabolismo , Feminino , Fluoruracila/administração & dosagem , Seguimentos , Humanos , Técnicas Imunoenzimáticas , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/metabolismo , Metástase Linfática , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Compostos Organoplatínicos/administração & dosagem , Oxaliplatina , Fosforilação , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de SobrevidaRESUMO
PURPOSE: The economic situation showed that the resources devoted to health spending are limited, making rationalisation of their consumption necessary. The relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses is becoming crucial. The ECO Foundation, promoting the quality of oncology care, set out to analyse the consensus on the new therapeutic targets inclusion and the integration of pharmacoeconomics when evaluating their effectiveness. METHODS: Study about pharmacoeconomic estimations was performed during the first ECO-Seminar (2010). It was developed using a modified Delphi method, in four stages: (1) committee coordinator establishment, (2) expert-panel selection, (3) preparation and submission of survey (1 question) by email, and (4) analysis of the degree of consensus reached. RESULTS: Results were obtained from surveys completed by 35 experts. Regarding the tolerable annual cost for the approval of new drugs, 68.8 % of the respondents considered a cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained between 30,000 and 100,000 acceptable (34.4 % 30,000-60,000; 34.4 % 60,000-100,000), 21.9 % of the respondents found costs between 100,000-150,000/QALY and 9.3 % of the respondents found costs above 150,000/QALY acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: The costs of new drugs are higher than traditional treatments, making it a priority to identify subgroups of patients with specific molecular profiles as candidates for higher-efficiency-targeted therapies. The allocation of the available resources to the most effective interventions, to achieve the best clinical outcomes with lower costs and best subjective profile possible, allows expenditure to be rationalised. Pharmacoeconomic studies are a basic tool for obtaining better health outcomes according to the available resources, while also considering the other needs of the population.
Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Custos de Medicamentos , Oncologia , Neoplasias/economia , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Análise Custo-Benefício , Técnica Delphi , Descoberta de Drogas , Farmacoeconomia , Humanos , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Valores Sociais , EspanhaRESUMO
AIM: Malignant insulinoma is an infrequent functional endocrine tumor of the pancreas. Adequate therapy is a demanding challenge for oncologists and endocrinologists. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of multidisciplinary management of malignant insulinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of patients with malignant insulinoma treated from 1995 to 2011. RESULTS: Seven patients with malignant insulinoma were included: four males and three females; median age was 61.8 years (range 37-78). Six tumors were sporadic and one was diagnosed in a patient with a type 1 multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN-1). Surgery was performed in six cases and one patient was considered unresectable. Hypoglycemias persisted in all cases and somatostatin analogs, glucocorticoids and diazoxide were used. Two patients received everolimus. Other techniques were chemoembolization and internal radiation therapy with yttrium-90. Successful liver transplant was done in the patient with MEN-1. CONCLUSION: Hypoglycemia management is complex and requires multiple therapies. Further evaluations will be necessary to determine the best treatment.