Late toxicity after adjuvant radiochemotherapy for gastric adenocarcinoma

14042

Background: There is limited late toxicity data following adjuvant radiochemotherapy for resected gastric cancer. Methods: We reviewed radiation dose volume histograms (DVHs) and toxicity outcomes for gastric cancer patients (stage Ib to IV) who received adjuvant conformal radiochemotherapy between November 2000 and May 2005. Charts were reviewed to determine survival, late clinical toxicity, and biochemical markers of renal or hepatic toxicity (creatinine, bilirubin, ALP, AST, ALT). DVHs for kidneys and liver were correlated with toxicity outcomes. Overall (OS), disease-free (DFS) and event (death or late toxicity) -free (EFS) survival were calculated. Results: 80 of 88 patients’ DVHs were available for review. Mean age was 58 years (range: 22 - 75), with 53 (66%) males and 27 (34%) females. Stage distribution was: IB - 13 (16%), II - 32 (40%), IIIA - 24 (30%), IIIB - 4 (9%) and IV - 7 (9%). 3D conformal radiotherapy (45 Gy/25 fractions) was used. In 69 patients, chemotherapy was standard as per the INT-116 study; 11 study patients received infusional 5FU (200mg/m2/day for 12 weeks) and cisplatin in escalating dose (4 cycles q 2 weeks, 0–30 mg/m2). All treatment was completed in 56 (70%) patients; 9 (11%) did not complete radiotherapy and 22 (27.5%) had chemotherapy dose omissions. Median follow up is 30 months (range 6–62). At 2 years, OS was 84% (95% CI 73%-90%), DFS was 66% (95% CI 53%-75%) and EFS was 61% (95% CI 49–72%). Clinical late toxicity occurred in 6 patients 9 to 53 months following treatment: bowel obstruction/perforation (2) and anastomotic stricture (4), in volumes treated to 45 Gy. No clinical symptoms of renal or hepatic toxicity were reported. Grade 1 (CTCAE v3.0) elevation of creatinine was observed in 8 (10%) patients; at least one liver test was altered in 22 (27.5%) patients, (grade 1–17; 2–4; 3–1). Abnormal bloodwork occurred 9 days to 55 months following treatment and did not correlate with higher kidney and liver doses. Conclusions: In our cohort of patients treated with conformal radiochemotherapy, small bowel and anastomotic toxicity was most common, with no clinical renal or hepatic toxicity observed. Biochemical renal and hepatic changes were not related to clinical toxicity or dose delivered. Further assessment with longer follow-up in a larger sample is planned.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

No Increase in Rejection or Graft Loss in Kidney Transplant Recipients With Thrombophilia Treated With Anticoagulation and Triple Immunosuppression

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies from Europe have demonstrated that patients with end-stage renal disease who receive a kidney transplant are at an increased risk for rejection and graft loss when compared with patients who have no known thrombophilia. The role of anticoagulation has not been investigated in these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We prospectively tested patients who were evaluated for a kidney transplant for 8 thrombophilias, protein S and C deficiencies, factor V Leiden mutation, antithrombin III deficiency, anticardiolipin antibody, lupus anticoagulant, prothrombin gene mutation, and heparin-induced platelet antibody (HIPA). Patients with any identified thrombophilia received heparin or argatroban (for HIPA (+) patients) followed by coumadin for 1 year after transplantation. Triple therapy included cyclosporine, prednisone, and CellCept (Roche Pharmaceuticals, Nutley, NJ, USA). Sensitized, black, or repeat transplantation patients received induction with an interleukin (IL)-2 inhibitor. Data were collected in a retrospective manner. Rejection was biopsy-proven.

RESULTS

Of the 112 transplant recipients who were tested for thrombophilia, 37 had 1 or more thrombophilia and 75 had no thrombophilia identified. Twenty-six patients received heparin and 11 received argatroban. There were no differences in recipient age, cold storage time, graft loss, HLA match, rejection episodes, 1-year graft survival, or serum creatinine level at 1 year. Significant differences were noted in posttransplantation bleeding, 35% versus 5%, and delayed graft function, 32% versus 15%, in patients with thrombophilia versus no thrombophilia, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to demonstrate that there is no increase in rejection or graft loss in kidney transplant recipients with thrombophilia when treated with anticoagulation and triple immunosuppression.

Ethical review of health research: a perspective from developing country researchers

BACKGROUND

Increasing collaboration between industrialised and developing countries in human research studies has led to concerns regarding the potential exploitation of resource deprived countries. This study, commissioned by the former National Bioethics Advisory Commission of the United States, surveyed developing country researchers about their concerns and opinions regarding ethical review processes and the performance of developing country and US international review boards (IRBs).

METHODS

Contact lists from four international organisations were used to identify and survey 670 health researchers in developing countries. A questionnaire with 169 questions explored issues of IRB review, informed consent, and recommendations.

RESULTS

The majority of the developing country researchers were middle aged males who were physicians and were employed by educational institutions, carrying out research on part time basis. Forty four percent of the respondents reported that their studies were not reviewed by a developing country IRB or Ministry of Health and one third of these studies were funded by the US. During the review process issues such as the need for local language consent forms and letters for approval, and confidentiality protection of participants were raised by US IRBs in significantly higher proportions than by host country IRBs.

CONCLUSION

This survey indicates the need for the ethical review of collaborative research in both US and host countries. It also reflects a desire for focused capacity development in supporting ethical review of research.