Diagnosis and treatment of bone metastasis: comprehensive guideline of the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology, Japanese Orthopedic Association, Japanese Urological Association, and Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology

Diagnosis and treatment of bone metastasis requires various types of measures, specialists and caregivers. To provide better diagnosis and treatment, a multidisciplinary team approach is required. The members of this multidisciplinary team include doctors of primary cancers, radiologists, pathologists, orthopaedists, radiotherapists, clinical oncologists, palliative caregivers, rehabilitation doctors, dentists, nurses, pharmacists, physical therapists, occupational therapists, medical social workers, etc. Medical evidence was extracted from published articles describing meta-analyses or randomised controlled trials concerning patients with bone metastases mainly from 2003 to 2013, and a guideline was developed according to the Medical Information Network Distribution Service Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. Multidisciplinary team meetings are helpful in diagnosis and treatment. Clinical benefits such as physical or psychological palliation obtained using the multidisciplinary team approaches are apparent. We established a guideline describing each specialty field, to improve understanding of the different fields among the specialists, who can further provide appropriate treatment, and to improve patients’ outcomes.

Does smoking or family history influence the prognosis of patients with non-small cell lung cancer?

The prognostic significance of pack-years smoked (PY) and family history of cancer (FH) was studied using the Cox proportional hazard model in 970 patients with non-small cell lung cancer. PY influenced survival only in women after other variables were adjusted [Hazard ratio (HR): 1.75 (1.45-2.11)]. FH also influenced survival with marginal significance in women with stage I disease [HR: 2.17 (0.89-5.29), p=0.088]. Furthermore, these two factors operated additively in women [HR for patients with both smoking and family histories over those without either: 2.25 (1.18-4.26)], but not in men.

A phase II study of palonosetron combined with dexamethasone to prevent nausea and vomiting induced by highly emetogenic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

This is a randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging study in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of palonosetron, in combination with dexamethasone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We randomized 233 patients to receive palonosetron as a single i.v. bolus dose of 0.075, 0.25, or 0.75 mg before administration of HEC. Dexamethasone (12-16 mg i.v. on day 1, 8 mg i.v. on day 2, and 4-8 mg i.v. on day 3) was administered for prophylactic antiemesis. Pharmacokinetics of palonosetron was analyzed in 24 patients.

RESULTS

In this study, all patients were given > or =50 mg/m(2) cisplatin, which was considered to be HEC. No significant differences in complete response (CR: no emesis and no rescue medication) rates were found in the first 24 h between the 0.075-, 0.25-, and 0.75-mg groups (77.6%, 81.8%, and 79.5%, respectively). In the 120-h period of overall observation, CR rates increased in a dose-dependent manner. In the 0.75-mg group, we observed a significantly longer time to treatment failure than in the 0.075-mg group (median time >120 versus 82.0 h, P = 0.038). Palonosetron was tolerated well and did not show any dose-related increase in adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Palonosetron at doses of 0.25 and 0.75 mg was shown to be effective in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with high CR rates of patients treated with HEC in Japan. All tested doses of palonosetron were tolerated well.

Phase I study of concurrent high-dose three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) without elective nodal irradiation with chemotherapy using cisplatin and vinorelbine for unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

7546

Background: The optimal dose of radiotherapy remains unclear in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for unresectable stage III NSCLC. Methods: Eligible patients (unresectable stage III NSCLC, age ≥ 20 years, PS 0–1, V20 ≤ 30%) received cisplatin (80mg/m2 day 1) and vinorelbine (20mg/m2 days 1 and 8) repeated every 4 weeks for 3–4 cycles. The dose of 3D-CRT was 66 Gy in 33 fractions, 72 Gy in 36 fractions, and 78 Gy in 39 fractions at levels 1–3, respectively. The dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), defined as grade ≥3 esophagitis, pneumonitis, myelitis, dermatitis and heart injury, and early stop of protocol treatment, was evaluated in 6–12 patients at each level. Results: Of the 17, 16 and 24 patients assessed for eligibility, 13 (76%), 12 (75%), and 6 (25%) were enrolled into levels 1–3, respectively, of the study. A total of 26 patients were excluded because of V20 > 30% (n=10), overdose to the esophagus (n=8) and brachial plexus (n=2), comorbidity (n=3), or patient refusal (n=3). There were 26 men and 5 women with a median (range) age of 60 (41–75) years. Of these, 23 (74%) had adenocarcinoma and 20 (65%) had stage IIIA disease. The full planned dose of radiotherapy could be administered in all the patients, and more than 80% of the patients received 3–4 cycles of chemotherapy. Grade 3–4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were noted in 24 (77%) and 5 (16%) of the 31 patients, respectively. Grade 4 infection, grade 3 esophagitis and grade 3 pulmonary toxicity were noted in one, two and one patients, respectively. DLT was noted in 17% of the patients at each level. Two (6%) complete and 27 (87%) partial responses were obtained. In a preliminary survival analysis, the median progression-free and overall survivals were determined to be 15.0 months and 37.6 months, respectively. Conclusions: At the level of 78Gy, only 25% of the patients assessed for eligibility were actually eligible. Toxicity was relatively mild up to 78 Gy in this highly selective patient group. Thus, we determined that the recommended dose of 3D-CRT administered concurrently with cisplatin and vinorelbine chemotherapy was 72Gy.

[Table: see text]