Latest News

More News


Site Logo

Coming to Grips With Hand-Foot Syndrome

August 1st 2004

Hand-foot syndrome is a localized cutaneous side effect associatedwith the administration of several chemotherapeutic agents, includingthe oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine (Xeloda). It is never life-threateningbut can develop into a painful and debilitating condition thatinterferes with patients' normal daily activities and quality of life. Severalsymptomatic/prophylactic treatments have been used to alleviatehand-foot syndrome, but as yet there is insufficient prospective clinicalevidence to support their use. The only proven method of managinghand-foot syndrome is treatment modification (interruption and/or dosereduction), and this strategy is recommended for patients receivingcapecitabine. Retrospective analysis of safety data from two largephase III trials investigating capecitabine as first-line therapy in patientswith colorectal cancer confirms that this strategy is effective inthe management of hand-foot syndrome and does not impair the efficacyof capecitabine. This finding is supported by studies evaluatingcapecitabine in metastatic breast cancer. Notably, the incidence andmanagement of hand-foot syndrome are similar when capecitabine isadministered in the metastatic and adjuvant settings, as monotherapy,or in combination with docetaxel (Taxotere). It is important that patientslearn to recognize the symptoms of hand-foot syndrome, so thatprompt symptomatic treatment and treatment modification strategiescan be implemented.


Site Logo

Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Breast Cancer: An Overlooked Option?

April 1st 2004

For many oncologists, neoadjuvant treatment for breast cancer issynonymous with preoperative cytotoxic chemotherapy, regardless oftumor characteristics. Preoperative therapy with an endocrine agent isgenerally considered suitable only for the frail elderly or the medicallyunfit. However, favorable information regarding third-generationaromatase inhibitors in the treatment of all stages of breast cancerprompts a reconsideration of this bias. In light of the fact thatneoadjuvant therapy with aromatase inhibitors is restricted to postmenopausalwomen with strongly estrogen-receptor–positive tumors, the assumptionthat neoadjuvant combination chemotherapy is more efficaciousthan a third-generation aromatase inhibitor can be reasonablyquestioned. It is particularly remarkable that the outcome of a comparisonof adjuvant tamoxifen vs anastrozole (Arimidex)-the Arimidex,Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial-in more than 6,000patients was predicted by a neoadjuvant trial that showed an efficacyadvantage for a third-generation aromatase inhibitor (letrozole[Femara]) compared to tamoxifen in a sample of 337 patients afteronly 4 months of treatment. The potential of the neoadjuvant setting inefforts to identify new biologic agents that could build on the effectivenessof adjuvant aromatase inhibitors is therefore beginning to be appreciated.Finally, neoadjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitorcould be considered a sensitivity test of endocrine therapy that might beincorporated into strategies to individualize treatment according to response.For this possibility to be realized, however, a better understandingof the relationship between surrogates from the neoadjuvant settingand the long-term outcome of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapywill have to be established through practice-setting clinical trials.