某三级医院乳腺癌紫杉烷类化疗患者的相对剂量强度分析

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-15 DOI:10.1177/10781552231214467
Amira M Helwani, Yousuf M Al Suleimani, Khalid Al Baimani, Aly M Abdelrahman
{"title":"某三级医院乳腺癌紫杉烷类化疗患者的相对剂量强度分析","authors":"Amira M Helwani, Yousuf M Al Suleimani, Khalid Al Baimani, Aly M Abdelrahman","doi":"10.1177/10781552231214467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Breast cancer (BC) is the most diagnosed tumor among women worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and causes of low relative dose intensity (RDI) < 85% for taxane-based chemotherapy regimens used in the treatment of BC in Sultan Qaboos University Hospital (SQUH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective study that included 303 BC patients, treated with taxane-based chemotherapy protocols at SQUH. RDI was calculated for each chemotherapy regimen and causes and predictors of low RDI < 85% were identified. Prophylactic and therapeutic supportive measures for certain toxicities were studied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>50.8% of the patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 38% had adjuvant chemotherapy, and 11.2% of patients were given palliative treatment. AC-T and AC-THP were the most used regimens (40.3% and 17.2%). Mean RDI of used taxane-based chemotherapy regimens was 93.4%. Dose delays, dose reductions, and treatment discontinuation occurred in 36.6%, 14.8%, and 11.5%, respectively. Thirty-eight patients (12.5%) had low RDI < 85% which was reduced to 9.9% after the use of an alternative taxane. Age and chemotherapy intent were significant risk factors. 83.8% received primary granulocyte colony stimulating factor.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An optimal RDI greater than 85% was achieved in most cases. Furthermore, prophylactic and therapeutic supportive measures were widely used.</p>","PeriodicalId":16637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice","volume":" ","pages":"1364-1371"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relative dose intensity of taxane-based chemotherapy in breast cancer patients in a tertiary hospital.\",\"authors\":\"Amira M Helwani, Yousuf M Al Suleimani, Khalid Al Baimani, Aly M Abdelrahman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10781552231214467\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Breast cancer (BC) is the most diagnosed tumor among women worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and causes of low relative dose intensity (RDI) < 85% for taxane-based chemotherapy regimens used in the treatment of BC in Sultan Qaboos University Hospital (SQUH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective study that included 303 BC patients, treated with taxane-based chemotherapy protocols at SQUH. RDI was calculated for each chemotherapy regimen and causes and predictors of low RDI < 85% were identified. Prophylactic and therapeutic supportive measures for certain toxicities were studied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>50.8% of the patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 38% had adjuvant chemotherapy, and 11.2% of patients were given palliative treatment. AC-T and AC-THP were the most used regimens (40.3% and 17.2%). Mean RDI of used taxane-based chemotherapy regimens was 93.4%. Dose delays, dose reductions, and treatment discontinuation occurred in 36.6%, 14.8%, and 11.5%, respectively. Thirty-eight patients (12.5%) had low RDI < 85% which was reduced to 9.9% after the use of an alternative taxane. Age and chemotherapy intent were significant risk factors. 83.8% received primary granulocyte colony stimulating factor.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An optimal RDI greater than 85% was achieved in most cases. Furthermore, prophylactic and therapeutic supportive measures were widely used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1364-1371\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10781552231214467\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10781552231214467","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

乳腺癌(BC)是全世界女性中诊断最多的肿瘤。本研究的目的是调查低相对剂量强度(RDI)方法的发生率和原因:这是一项回顾性研究,包括303名BC患者,在SQUH接受紫杉烷为基础的化疗方案。计算各化疗方案的RDI及低RDI的原因及预测因素结果:50.8%的患者接受了新辅助化疗,38%的患者接受了辅助化疗,11.2%的患者接受了姑息治疗。AC-T和AC-THP是使用最多的方案(40.3%和17.2%)。紫杉烷类化疗方案的平均RDI为93.4%。剂量延迟、剂量减少和停止治疗的发生率分别为36.6%、14.8%和11.5%。38例(12.5%)患者RDI低。结论:大多数患者RDI大于85%。此外,预防和治疗性支持措施被广泛使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Relative dose intensity of taxane-based chemotherapy in breast cancer patients in a tertiary hospital.

Introduction: Breast cancer (BC) is the most diagnosed tumor among women worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and causes of low relative dose intensity (RDI) < 85% for taxane-based chemotherapy regimens used in the treatment of BC in Sultan Qaboos University Hospital (SQUH).

Methods: This was a retrospective study that included 303 BC patients, treated with taxane-based chemotherapy protocols at SQUH. RDI was calculated for each chemotherapy regimen and causes and predictors of low RDI < 85% were identified. Prophylactic and therapeutic supportive measures for certain toxicities were studied.

Results: 50.8% of the patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 38% had adjuvant chemotherapy, and 11.2% of patients were given palliative treatment. AC-T and AC-THP were the most used regimens (40.3% and 17.2%). Mean RDI of used taxane-based chemotherapy regimens was 93.4%. Dose delays, dose reductions, and treatment discontinuation occurred in 36.6%, 14.8%, and 11.5%, respectively. Thirty-eight patients (12.5%) had low RDI < 85% which was reduced to 9.9% after the use of an alternative taxane. Age and chemotherapy intent were significant risk factors. 83.8% received primary granulocyte colony stimulating factor.

Conclusion: An optimal RDI greater than 85% was achieved in most cases. Furthermore, prophylactic and therapeutic supportive measures were widely used.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
276
期刊介绍: Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to educating health professionals about providing pharmaceutical care to patients with cancer. It is the official publication of the International Society for Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners (ISOPP). Publishing pertinent case reports and consensus guidelines...
期刊最新文献
Cytotoxic surface contamination in hospitals: Current practices, challenges and perspectives. Cytomegalovirus viremia and hepatitis B reactivation in patient with RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer treated with pralsetinib. Workflow evaluation of environmental contamination with hazardous drugs during compounding and administration in an UK hospital. An assessment of seven closed system transfer devices in accordance with the 2015 NIOSH vapor containment performance protocol. Hospital pharmacists' perceived competence in providing care to oncology patients - (HoPP-CoP2).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1