Ladoire S.,Georges Francois Leclerc Center |
Ladoire S.,French Institute of Health and Medical Research |
Eymard J.C.,Jean Godinot Institute |
Zanetta S.,Georges Francois Leclerc Center |
And 8 more authors.
Background: There is currently no standard of treatment for patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) after failure of docetaxel-based chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to assess the anticancer activity and tolerance of metronomic cyclophosphamide prednisolone combination in this setting. Patients and Methods: From 2005 to 2010, patients with HRPC who failed at least docetaxel-based chemotherapy were proposed metronomic cyclophosphamide-prednisolone regimen, and were prospectively registered. Twenty-three patients received 50 mg cyclophosphamide and 10 mg prednisolone per os daily until disease progression. Treatment tolerance and efficacy on PSA decrease and pain were studied. Results: Metronomic cyclophosphamide prednisolone was safe, well tolerated, and demonstrated interesting clinical activity, yielding a prostate specific antigen decrease by ≥50% in 26% of patients and decrease by ≥30% in 48% of patients, but also favorable palliative effects on pain in 43% of patients. The median progression-free survival was 6 months (95% Cl: 4-8 months) and the median overall survival was 11 months (95% Cl: 7-19 months). Conclusion: For this patient population, low dose metronomic cyclophosphamide prednisolone might be a viable alternative. Its convenient oral administration, low cost, and lack of toxicity justify further studies alone, or in combination with other agents in HRPC patients. Source
Ripert T.,Reims Academic Hospital |
Bayoud Y.,Reims Academic Hospital |
Messaoudi R.,Reims Academic Hospital |
Menard J.,Reims Academic Hospital |
And 4 more authors.
Journal of the Canadian Urological Association
Background: The objective of this study is to evaluate the feasibility, tolerance and efficacy of salvage external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in persistent or recurrent prostate cancer after failed high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy. Methods: We reviewed data on tolerance and oncologic outcomes for all patients with biopsy-proven locally recurrent or persistent prostate cancer who underwent salvage EBRT in our department between April 2004 and June 2008. Minimum follow-up for inclusion was 2 years. Failure with EBRT was defined as biochemical relapse (Phoenix definition) or introduction of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Gastrointestinal and urinary toxicity and urinary stress incontinence were scored at 12 and 24 months (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and Ingelman Sundberg rating, respectively). Results: The mean age of the patients was 68.8 years (range: 60-79). Mean prostate-specific antigen (PSA) before EBRT was 5.57 ng/mL (range: 2.5-14.8). Median follow-up was 36.5 ± 10.9 months (range: 24-54). No patient received adjunctive ADT. The EBRT course was well-tolerated and completed by all patients. The mean PSA nadir was 0.62 ng/mL (range: 0.03-2.4) and occurred after a median of 22 months (range: 12-36). One patient experienced biochemical failure and was prescribed ADT 30 months after EBRT. The disease-free survival rate was 83.3% at 36.5 months. There was no major EBRT-related toxicity at 12 or 24 months. Conclusions: Our early clinical results confirm the feasibility and good tolerance of salvage radiotherapy after HIFU failure. Oncological outcomes were promising. A prospective study with longer follow-up is needed to identify factors predictive of success for salvage EBRT therapy after HIFU failure. © 2012 Canadian Urological Association. Source
Bouillet T.,APHP |
Bigard X.,French Anti doping Agency |
Brami C.,Jean Godinot Institute |
Chouahnia K.,APHP |
And 11 more authors.
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
This overview reports published data about the interaction between physical activity and sport during and after cancer on one hand and improvement in psychological parameters, survival and biological mechanisms underlying this effect on the other hand. Practising physical activity and sport during cancer modifies parameters assessing fatigue and quality of life and reduces symptoms of depression. An association also exists between the practise of physical activity and sport and overall and cancer-specific survivals, especially after breast cancer, colon cancer and prostate cancer.These benefits seem to be mediated by a modification of circulating levels of estrogens, insulin, IGF-1 and by a decrease in insulin-resistance, by alterations in the secretion of adipokines, and by a reduction in chronic inflammation through decreased levels of cytokines.There exist some obstacles to the practise of physical activity. These obstacles are mainly related to a fear of pain induced by physical activity and to overweight.These programmes of physical activity and sport cannot be offered to all patients since there are several contra-indications, with some being present since the initial visit and others appearing during cancer management either due to disease progression or related to iatrogenic effects.Whereas benefits from physical activity and sport among cancer patients seem obvious, there are still several pending clinical and biological issues. © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Source
Janus N.,Service Icar |
Scotte F.,Georges Pompidou European Hospital |
Rey J.-B.,Jean Godinot Institute |
Amet S.,Georges Pompidou European Hospital |
And 5 more authors.
Supportive Care in Cancer
Purpose: Implantable central venous access port (portacath) is used to provide long-term venous access and to deliver chemotherapy in cancer patients. Intravenous iron complexes are frequently prescribed in this setting, and some physicians use a portacath for their administration. The aim of this survey was to assess the frequency of this practice and the reasons supporting it. Methods: This declarative survey was conducted in France; 497 oncologists/hematologists were contacted to answer a survey on their practices regarding the administration of intravenous iron via a portacath. Results: A total of 141 recipients (29.5 %) completed the questionnaire. The intravenous iron complexes most frequently used were iron sucrose and ferric carboxymaltose, and 55.2 % of the responders reported using a portacath to administer intravenous iron complexes. The main reasons mentioned for this practice were ease of administration (27.9 %) and preservation of venous capital (27.6 %). The main reasons reported for not using a portacath to administer intravenous iron were a history of thrombosis (45.1 %) or potential drug interactions (17.7 %). Efficacy and safety were expected to be similar to those observed with peripheral administration. A 47.6 % of physicians declared that they usually did not observe adverse reactions after use of a portacath for iron administration. Intravenous iron administration was always planned after chemotherapy for 46.6 % of the responders and before chemotherapy for 38.2 %, whereas 15.3 % did not have any preference for either option. Conclusions: Intravenous iron complexes (mainly iron sucrose and ferric carboxymaltose) are commonly administered through a portacath in cancer patients in France. The choice for this route of administration is supported by clinical considerations, but further studies are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of this practice. © 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Source
Freyer G.,Lyon Sud Hospital |
Freyer G.,Jean Godinot Institute |
Jovenin N.,Jean Godinot Institute |
Yazbek G.,Jean Godinot Institute |
And 6 more authors.
Aim: To carry out a prospective, multicenter and observational study describing prophylactic strategies [cycle delay, dose-reduction, (G-CSF) prescription] to prevent recurrence of neutropenic events (NE) in patients with solid tumors, and identify potential predictive factors of NE recurrence. Patients and Methods: Patients ≥18 years old with an NE in a previous chemotherapy cycle (cycle A) without GCSF support, followed for four cycles (B to E) were included in the study. NE was defined as any neutropenia grade 1-4, febrile or not, which impacted on subsequent chemotherapy cycles (cycle delay, or reduction, or prophylactic G-CSF). Results: Data of 548 patients were analyzed, 378 (69%) were female, with a mean (SD) age of 61.7 (12.3) years. WHO PS: 0-1: 88.3%, incidence of breast cancer: 40%, metastatic disease: 53.3%. Following the first NE episode, 44.5% of patients had cycle delay, 22.3% dose reduction and 466 (85%) received prophylactic G-CSF. NE recurrence rates were: 21.2% at cycle B, 18.6% at cycle C, 11.5% at cycle D and 12.9% at cycle E. G-CSF support (hazard ratio: 0.32, 0.24-0.43, p<0.001) was associated with lower NE recurrence. Pegfilgrastim seemed to offer the highest protection (hazard ratio; HR=0.23, 95% CI: 0.16-0.32; p<0.001). Conclusion: Secondary G-CSF prophylaxis has significant efficacy in reducing the incidence of NE and should be considered as a valuable option. Source