Adhésion thérapeutique aux traitements oncologiques oraux et prise en charge interdisciplinaire [Therapeutic adherence to oral cancer therapy and interdisciplinary management].

Medication adherence is a well-known risk factor in internal medicine. However in oncology this dimension is emerging due to the increasing number of oral formulations. First results in the oral oncology literature suggest that patients' ability to cope with medical prescription decreases with time. This might preclude patients from reaching clinical outcomes. Factors impacting on medication adherence to oral oncology treatments have not been yet extensively described neither strategies to address them and support patient's needs. Oncologists and pharmacists in our University outpatient settings performed a pilot study which aimed at measuring and facilitating adherence to oral oncology treatments and at understanding determinants of patient's adherence. The ultimate purpose of such a patient-centered and interdisciplinary collaboration would be to promote patient self-management and complement the standard medical follow-up.

Oral cancer treatments and adherence: medication event monitoring system assessment for capecitabine

Background: Oncological treatments are traditionally administered via intravenous injection by qualified personnel. Oral formulas which are developing rapidly are preferred by patients and facilitate administration however they may increase non-adherence. In this study 4 common oral chemotherapeutics are given to 50 patients, who are still in the process of inclusion, divided into 4 groups. The aim is to evaluate adherence and offer these patients interdisciplinary support with the joint help of doctors and pharmacists. We present here the results for capecitabine. Materials and Methods: The final goal is to evaluate adhesion in 50 patients split into 4 groups according to oral treatments (letrozole/exemestane, imatinib/sunitinib, capecitabine and temozolomide) using persistence and quality of execution as parameters. These parameters are evaluated using a medication event monitoring system (MEMS®) in addition to routine oncological visits and semi-structured interviews. Patients were monitored for the entire duration of treatment up to a maximum of 1 year. Patient satisfaction was assessed at the end of the monitoring period using a standardized questionary. Results: Capecitabine group included 2 women and 8 men with a median age of 55 years (range: 36−77 years) monitored for an average duration of 100 days (range: 5-210 days). Persistence was 98% and quality of execution 95%. 5 patients underwent cyclic treatment (2 out of 3 weeks) and 5 patients continuous treatment. Toxicities higher than grade 1 were grade 2−3 hand-foot syndrome in 1 patient and grade 3 acute coronary syndrome in 1 patient both without impact on adherence. Patients were satisfied with the interviews undergone during the study (57% useful, 28% very useful, 15% useless) and successfully integrated the MEMS® in their daily lives (57% very easily, 43% easily) according to the results obtained by questionary at the end of the monitoring period. Conclusion: Persistence and quality of execution observed in our Capecitabine group of patients were excellent and better than expected compared to previously published studies. The interdisciplinary approach allowed us to better identify and help patients with toxicities to maintain adherence. Overall patients were satisfied with the global interdisciplinary follow-up. With longer follow up better evaluation of our method and its impact will be possible. Interpretation of the results of patients in the other groups of this ongoing trial will provide us information for a more detailed analysis.

Coffee and tea intake and risk of head and neck cancer: pooled analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Only a few studies have explored the relation between coffee and tea intake and head and neck cancers, with inconsistent results. METHODS: We pooled individual-level data from nine case-control studies of head and neck cancers, including 5,139 cases and 9,028 controls. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Caffeinated coffee intake was inversely related with the risk of cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx: the ORs were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.94-0.98) for an increment of 1 cup per day and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.47-0.80) in drinkers of >4 cups per day versus nondrinkers. This latter estimate was consistent for different anatomic sites (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.71 for oral cavity; OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.82 for oropharynx/hypopharynx; and OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37-1.01 for oral cavity/pharynx not otherwise specified) and across strata of selected covariates. No association of caffeinated coffee drinking was found with laryngeal cancer (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.64-1.45 in drinkers of >4 cups per day versus nondrinkers). Data on decaffeinated coffee were too sparse for detailed analysis, but indicated no increased risk. Tea intake was not associated with head and neck cancer risk (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.89-1.11 for drinkers versus nondrinkers). CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis of case-control studies supports the hypothesis of an inverse association between caffeinated coffee drinking and risk of cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx. IMPACT: Given widespread use of coffee and the relatively high incidence and low survival of head and neck cancers, the observed inverse association may have appreciable public health relevance.

Body mass index, cigarette smoking, and alcohol consumption and cancers of the oral cavity, pharynx, and larynx: modeling odds ratios in pooled case-control data.

Odds ratios for head and neck cancer increase with greater cigarette and alcohol use and lower body mass index (BMI; weight (kg)/height(2) (m(2))). Using data from the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium, the authors conducted a formal analysis of BMI as a modifier of smoking- and alcohol-related effects. Analysis of never and current smokers included 6,333 cases, while analysis of never drinkers and consumers of < or =10 drinks/day included 8,452 cases. There were 8,000 or more controls, depending on the analysis. Odds ratios for all sites increased with lower BMI, greater smoking, and greater drinking. In polytomous regression, odds ratios for BMI (P = 0.65), smoking (P = 0.52), and drinking (P = 0.73) were homogeneous for oral cavity and pharyngeal cancers. Odds ratios for BMI and drinking were greater for oral cavity/pharyngeal cancer (P < 0.01), while smoking odds ratios were greater for laryngeal cancer (P < 0.01). Lower BMI enhanced smoking- and drinking-related odds ratios for oral cavity/pharyngeal cancer (P < 0.01), while BMI did not modify smoking and drinking odds ratios for laryngeal cancer. The increased odds ratios for all sites with low BMI may suggest related carcinogenic mechanisms; however, BMI modification of smoking and drinking odds ratios for cancer of the oral cavity/pharynx but not larynx cancer suggests additional factors specific to oral cavity/pharynx cancer.

Interaction between tobacco and alcohol use and the risk of head and neck cancer: pooled analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The magnitude of risk conferred by the interaction between tobacco and alcohol use on the risk of head and neck cancers is not clear because studies have used various methods to quantify the excess head and neck cancer burden. METHODS: We analyzed individual-level pooled data from 17 European and American case-control studies (11,221 cases and 16,168 controls) participating in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology consortium. We estimated the multiplicative interaction parameter (psi) and population attributable risks (PAR). RESULTS: A greater than multiplicative joint effect between ever tobacco and alcohol use was observed for head and neck cancer risk (psi = 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.53-3.04). The PAR for tobacco or alcohol was 72% (95% confidence interval, 61-79%) for head and neck cancer, of which 4% was due to alcohol alone, 33% was due to tobacco alone, and 35% was due to tobacco and alcohol combined. The total PAR differed by subsite (64% for oral cavity cancer, 72% for pharyngeal cancer, 89% for laryngeal cancer), by sex (74% for men, 57% for women), by age (33% for cases <45 years, 73% for cases >60 years), and by region (84% in Europe, 51% in North America, 83% in Latin America). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that the joint effect between tobacco and alcohol use is greater than multiplicative on head and neck cancer risk. However, a substantial proportion of head and neck cancers cannot be attributed to tobacco or alcohol use, particularly for oral cavity cancer and for head and neck cancer among women and among young-onset cases.

Risk factors for head and neck cancer in young adults: a pooled analysis in the INHANCE consortium.

BACKGROUND: Increasing incidence of head and neck cancer (HNC) in young adults has been reported. We aimed to compare the role of major risk factors and family history of cancer in HNC in young adults and older patients. METHODS: We pooled data from 25 case-control studies and conducted separate analyses for adults ≤45 years old ('young adults', 2010 cases and 4042 controls) and >45 years old ('older adults', 17 700 cases and 22 704 controls). Using logistic regression with studies treated as random effects, we estimated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The young group of cases had a higher proportion of oral tongue cancer (16.0% in women; 11.0% in men) and unspecified oral cavity / oropharynx cancer (16.2%; 11.1%) and a lower proportion of larynx cancer (12.1%; 16.6%) than older adult cases. The proportions of never smokers or never drinkers among female cases were higher than among male cases in both age groups. Positive associations with HNC and duration or pack-years of smoking and drinking were similar across age groups. However, the attributable fractions (AFs) for smoking and drinking were lower in young when compared with older adults (AFs for smoking in young women, older women, young men and older men, respectively, = 19.9% (95% CI = 9.8%, 27.9%), 48.9% (46.6%, 50.8%), 46.2% (38.5%, 52.5%), 64.3% (62.2%, 66.4%); AFs for drinking = 5.3% (-11.2%, 18.0%), 20.0% (14.5%, 25.0%), 21.5% (5.0%, 34.9%) and 50.4% (46.1%, 54.3%). A family history of early-onset cancer was associated with HNC risk in the young [OR = 2.27 (95% CI = 1.26, 4.10)], but not in the older adults [OR = 1.10 (0.91, 1.31)]. The attributable fraction for family history of early-onset cancer was 23.2% (8.60% to 31.4%) in young compared with 2.20% (-2.41%, 5.80%) in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in HNC aetiology according to age group may exist. The lower AF of cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking in young adults may be due to the reduced length of exposure due to the lower age. Other characteristics, such as those that are inherited, may play a more important role in HNC in young adults compared with older adults.