Arturas Inciura

Comparison of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the management of advanced ovarian cancer: a retrospective study of 574 patients

BackgroundThere is a lack of clinical data on the validity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of ovarian cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of the adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens on the clinical outcomes in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of 574 patients with advanced ovarian cancer admitted to four Lithuanian oncogynaecology departments during 1993–2000. The conventional combined treatment of cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy was applied to both the group that underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 213) and to the control group (n = 361). The selection criterion for neoadjuvant chemotherapy was large extent of the disease. Overall and progression-free survival rates and survival medians were calculated using life tables and the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsThere was no difference in median overall survival between stage III patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (25.9 months vs. 29.3 months, p = 0.2508) and stage IV patients (15.4 months vs. 14.9 months, p = 0.6108). Similarly, there was no difference in median progression-free survival between stage III patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (15.7 months vs. 17.5 months, p = 0.1299) and stage IV patients (8.7 months vs. 8.2 months, p = 0.1817). There was no difference in the rate of the optimal cytoreductive surgery between patients who underwent the neoadjuvant chemotherapy and patients primarily treated with surgery (n = 134, 63% vs. n = 242, 67%, respectively).ConclusionThere was no difference in progression-free or overall survival and in the rate of optimal cytoreductive surgery between the neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy groups despite the fact that patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a more extensive disease. Multivariate analysis failed to prove that neoadjuvant chemotherapy could be considered as an independent prognostic factor for survival, and the findings need to be investigated in the future prospective randomised studies.

Corticosteroid-Responsive Pulmonary Toxicity Associated with Fludarabine Monophosphate: A Case Report

Fludarabine monophosphate is an effective drug for the treatment of lymphoid malignancies. Myelosuppression, opportunistic infections, and autoimmune hemolytic anemia are the most common side effects of fludarabine. Herein we report a 55-year-old female that presented with fever and dyspnea after completing her third cycle of FMD (fludarabine, mitoxantrone, and dexamethasone) chemotherapy for stage IV non-Hodgkin follicular lymphoma. Chest X-ray revealed bilateral pneumofibrotic changes and chest CT showed bilateral diffuse interstitial changes with fibrotic alterations. No evidence of infectious agents was noted. The patient had a reduced carbon monoxide transfer factor (45%). Her symptoms and radiographic findings resolved following treatment with prednisolone. The literature contains several cases of fludarabine-associated interstitial pulmonary toxicity that responded to steroid therapy. Fludarabine-induced pulmonary toxicity is reversible with cessation of the drug and administration of glucocorticosteroids. Conflict of interest:None declared.

Duffy and Kidd Genotyping Facilitates Pretransfusion Testing in Patients Undergoing Long-Term Transfusion Therapy

Objective: Conventional serologic typing of red blood cell systems other than ABO and RhD can be inaccurate and difficult to interpret in patients who have recently undergone blood transfusion. While molecular-based assays are not used routinely, the usefulness of genotyping was investigated in order to determine patients who may benefit from this procedure. Materials and Methods: Blood samples were taken from 101 patients with haemato-oncological, chronic renal, or gastroenterological diseases and from 50 donor controls; the samples were tested for Fya and Fyb by applying serologic and genetic methods. All patients had received 3 or more units of RBCs during the last 3 months. An average of 6.1 RBC units were transfused per patient. The average length of time from transfusion until blood sampling was 24.4 days. The haemagglutination test was applied for serological analysis, and the restriction length polymorphism assay was used for genotyping. Results: In total, 33 (32.7%) patients showed positive reactions with anti-Fya or anti-Fyb while being negative genetically. False-positive Fya results were found in 23 samples, and false-positive Fyb in 10 specimens. During the last 3 months, significantly more RBC units were transfused to patients with discrepant results than to those with accurate phenotyping/genotyping results: median of 5 (mean ± SE: 6.85±0.69) versus median of 4 (mean: 5.71±0.51), respectively (p=0.025). The median length of time after the last transfusion was 25 days (mean: 28.72±2.23 days) in the group with accurate phenotyping/genotyping results versus a median of 14 days (mean: 15.52±1.95 days) in the group with discrepant results (p=0.001). Phenotypes and genotypes coincided in all donor samples. Conclusion: Genotyping assays for the Duffy system should be considered if the patient underwent blood transfusion less than 3 or 4 weeks before the sample collection. If the time frame from RBC transfusion exceeds 6 weeks, Duffy phenotyping can provide accurate results.