1
|
Mehran S, Taravati A, Baljani E, Rasmi Y, Gholinejad Z. Fever and breast cancer: A critical review of the literature and possible underlying mechanisms. Breast Dis 2021; 40:117-131. [PMID: 33749632 DOI: 10.3233/bd-201001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Fever is a common feature in various pathological conditions that manifests a series of molecular events in the internal milieu. Much less attention has been paid to the clinical importance and the management of fever in breast cancer patients. However, several studies have reported an association between postoperative fever and poor treatment outcomes in breast cancer patients. The fever is a side effect of chemotherapy and a manifestation of cancer recurrence. The postmenopausal breast cancer patients experience another body temperature disturbance that is known as a hot flashes. Here, we reviewed the literature regarding postoperative fever and the possible underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms. Then the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was discussed as a therapeutic option to control postoperative fever. Finally, we reviewed the chemotherapy-induced neutropenic fever and cancer vaccination-induced fever.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shiva Mehran
- Department of Biology, Higher Education Institute of Rabe-Rashidi, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Afshin Taravati
- Department of Veterinary Science, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran
| | - Esfandiar Baljani
- Department of Nursing, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran
| | - Yousef Rasmi
- Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Urmia University of Medical Science, Urmia, Iran
| | - Zafar Gholinejad
- Department of Medical Laboratory Science, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Yamamura J, Masuda N, Yamamoto D, Tsuyuki S, Yamaguchi M, Tanaka S, Tsurutani J, Tokunaga S, Yoshidome K, Mizutani M, Aono T, Ooe A, Tanino H, Matsunami N, Yasojima H, Nakayama T, Nishida Y. Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine Combination Chemotherapy in Taxane-Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Phase II Study of the Kinki Multidisciplinary Breast Oncology Group (KMBOG) 1015. Chemotherapy 2017; 62:307-313. [DOI: 10.1159/000475879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2017] [Accepted: 04/18/2017] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Background: This phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the chemotherapy combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in taxane-pretreated Japanese metastatic breast cancer patients. Methods: In this multicenter, phase II, single-arm study, patients with recurrent or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer were administered gemcitabine (1,200 mg/m2) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate, and other endpoints included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results: A total of 42 patients were enrolled in this study. The objective response rate and clinical benefit rate were 24 and 43%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 4.0 months. The median overall survival was 11.1 months. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was the most common hematologic toxicity, occurring in 22 patients (54%). Nonhematologic toxicity was moderate and transient, with fatigue (48%) being the most common condition and no severe adverse event reported. Conclusion: The combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine is an effective and tolerable regimen for HER2-negative, taxane-pretreated, metastatic breast cancer patients in Japan.
Collapse
|
3
|
Ashdown ML, Robinson AP, Yatomi-Clarke SL, Ashdown ML, Allison A, Abbott D, Markovic SN, Coventry BJ. Chemotherapy for Late-Stage Cancer Patients: Meta-Analysis of Complete Response Rates. F1000Res 2015; 4:232. [PMID: 26834979 PMCID: PMC4706056 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.6760.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/07/2015] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Complete response (CR) rates reported for cytotoxic chemotherapy for late-stage cancer patients are generally low, with few exceptions, regardless of the solid cancer type or drug regimen. We investigated CR rates reported in the literature for clinical trials using chemotherapy alone, across a wide range of tumour types and chemotherapeutic regimens, to determine an overall CR rate for late-stage cancers. A total of 141 reports were located using the PubMed database. A meta-analysis was performed of reported CR from 68 chemotherapy trials (total 2732 patients) using standard agents across late-stage solid cancers—a binomial model with random effects was adopted. Mean CR rates were compared for different cancer types, and for chemotherapeutic agents with different mechanisms of action, using a logistic regression. Our results showed that the CR rates for chemotherapy treatment of late-stage cancer were generally low at 7.4%, regardless of the cancer type or drug regimen used. We found no evidence that CR rates differed between different chemotherapy drug types, but amongst different cancer types small CR differences were evident, although none exceeded a mean CR rate of 11%. This remarkable concordance of CR rates regardless of cancer or therapy type remains currently unexplained, and motivates further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin L Ashdown
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Andrew P Robinson
- Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | | | | | - Andrew Allison
- Centre for Biomedical Engineering (CBME), University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; School of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Derek Abbott
- Centre for Biomedical Engineering (CBME), University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; School of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | | | - Brendon J Coventry
- Department of Surgery & Tumour Immunology Laboratory, University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Breast, Endocrine & Surgical Oncology Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, South Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparation, dispensing, and administration of antineoplastic therapy, and the agents, both commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases. Questions or suggestions for topics should be addressed to Dominic A. Solimando, Jr, President, Oncology Pharmacy Services, Inc., 4201 Wilson Blvd #110-545, Arlington, VA 22203, e-mail: OncRxSvc@comcast.net; or J. Aubrey Waddell, Professor, University of Tennessee College of Pharmacy; Oncology Pharmacist, Pharmacy Department, Blount Memorial Hospital, 907 E. Lamar Alexander Parkway, Maryville, TN 37804, e-mail: waddfour@charter.net.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth Y Shang
- Dr. Shang is a pharmacist with the American Red Cross, Department of Pharmacy, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Dominic A Solimando
- Dr. Shang is a pharmacist with the American Red Cross, Department of Pharmacy, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , Bethesda, Maryland
| | - J Aubrey Waddell
- Dr. Shang is a pharmacist with the American Red Cross, Department of Pharmacy, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abdayem P, Ghosn M, Valero V, Walters R, Arun B, Murray JL, Theriault R, Frye D, Ibrahim NK. Phase I and II Study of Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine in Heavily Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer and Review of the Literature. J Cancer 2014; 5:351-9. [PMID: 24723978 PMCID: PMC3982182 DOI: 10.7150/jca.8304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2013] [Accepted: 02/01/2014] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Many phase II trials investigated the combination of Gemcitabine (G) and Vinorelbine (V) in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with variable outcomes. This study was conducted to explore whether this combination was effective and tolerable in MBC patients who were heavily pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. Methods: A phase I study was conducted first to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the G and V combination in MBC patients. Then, a phase II study evaluated the response rates, the median time to progression (TTP), the overall survival (OS) as well as the toxicities resulting from this combination at the MTD. Results: Nine patients were enrolled in the phase I study. The MTD was identified as 700mg/m2 of G on days 1 and 8 in combination with 15 mg/m2 of V on days 2 and 9, every 21 days. Twenty-one of 25 patients involved in the phase II study were evaluable for response. No complete or partial responses were achieved; 6 patients (24.0%) had stable disease and 15 (60.0%) progressed. The median TTP was 2 months and the median OS 10 months. Grade 3/4 Neutropenia was the major hematologic toxicity, occurring in 52% of the cycles. The most common non-hematologic grade 3/4 toxicities were fatigue (18%), myalgias (17%) and arthralgias (13%). Conclusion: In heavily pretreated patients with MBC, the combination of G and V at the doses stated above was ineffective as it did not induce partial or complete responses. Other chemotherapy agents or combinations should be evaluated in future studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pamela Abdayem
- 1. Faculty of Medicine, Saint-Joseph University, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Marwan Ghosn
- 2. Professor, Chairman of the department of Hematology and Medical Oncology at Saint-Joseph University Faculty of Medicine, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Vicente Valero
- 3. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA
| | - Ronald Walters
- 3. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA
| | - Banu Arun
- 3. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA
| | - James L Murray
- 3. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA
| | - Richard Theriault
- 3. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA
| | - Debbie Frye
- 3. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA
| | - Nuhad K Ibrahim
- 3. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
AMADORI DINO, CARRASCO EVA, ROESEL SIEGFRIED, LABIANCA ROBERTO, UZIELY BEATRICE, SOLDATENKOVA VICTORIA, MOREAU VALERIE, DESAIAH DURISALA, BAUKNECHT THOMAS, MARTIN MIGUEL. A randomized phase II non-comparative study of pemetrexed-carboplatin and gemcitabine-vinorelbine in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated advanced breast cancer patients. Int J Oncol 2013; 42:1778-85. [DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2013.1869] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2012] [Accepted: 11/12/2012] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
|
7
|
Stemmler HJ, diGioia D, Freier W, Tessen HW, Gitsch G, Jonat W, Brugger W, Kettner E, Abenhardt W, Tesch H, Hurtz HJ, Rösel S, Brudler O, Heinemann V. Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2011; 104:1071-8. [PMID: 21407218 PMCID: PMC3068513 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.86] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2010] [Revised: 02/11/2011] [Accepted: 02/21/2011] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND An increasing proportion of patients are exposed to anthracyclines and/or taxanes in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. Re-exposure in the metastatic stage is limited by drug resistance, thus evaluation of non-cross-resistant regimens is mandatory. METHODS Anthracycline-pretreated patients were randomly assigned to three gemcitabine-based regimens. Chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine 1.000 mg m(-2) plus vinorelbin 25 mg m(-2) on days 1+8 (GemVin), or plus cisplatin 30 mg m(-2) on days 1+8 (GemCis), or plus capecitabine 650 mg m(-2) b.i.d. orally days 1-14 (GemCap), q3w. The primary end point was response rate. RESULTS A total of 141 patients were recruited on the trial. The overall response rates were 39.0% (GemVin), 47.7% (GemCis) and 34.7% (GemCap). Median progression-free survival was estimated with 5.7, 6.9 and 8.3 months, respectively. Corresponding median survival times were 17.5 (GemVin), 13.0 (GemCis) and 19.4 months (GemCap). Neutropenia ≥grade 3 occurred in 16.7% (Gem/Vin), 4.4% (GemCis) and 0% (Gem/Cap), whereas non-haematological toxicities were rarely severe except grade 3 hand-foot syndrome in 2.0% of the GemCap patients (per patient analysis). CONCLUSIONS This randomised phase II trial has revealed comparable results for three gemcitabine-based regimens regarding treatment efficacy and toxicity. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to be a worthwhile treatment option for pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H J Stemmler
- Med. Department III, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Munich, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|