Background/Aim: Nivolumab is effective against advanced gastric cancer (AGC) refractory to or in patients intolerant of standard chemotherapy. This study was designed to clarify the impact of cancer cachexia in patients with AGC who received nivolumab. Patients and Methods: We recruited AGC patients who were treated with nivolumab from October 2017 to December 2019. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without cancer cachexia at the start of nivolumab. Cancer cachexia was defined as weight loss >5%; weight loss >2% and body mass index (BMI) <20; or sarcopenia and BMI <20. Primary endpoints were median overall survival (OS) and median time to treatment failure (TTF), while secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and incidence of adverse events. Results: The study enrolled 44 patients. Median OS and TTF were significantly shorter in patients with cancer cachexia than in those without cancer cachexia (OS: 6.6 vs. 2.3 months; HR=2.65; 95%CI=1.28-5.49; p=0.008, TTF: 2.6 vs. 1.9 months; HR=2.17; 95%CI=1.09-4.32, p=0.027). On Cox proportional hazards analysis, cancer cachexia was significantly associated with shorter OS. The incidence of adverse events did not differ between the two groups. Nivolumab was associated with better OS and TTF outcomes in AGC patients without cachexia than in those with cachexia, albeit there was no difference in the incidence of adverse events. Conclusion: Cancer cachexia may be associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients with AGC treated with nivolumab.

Objective. TAS‐102 is effective for treating patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study determined whether combining bevacizumab (Bmab) with TAS‐102 improves clinical outcomes in refractory mCRC. Patients and Methods. We retrospectively analyzed data from Japanese patients with refractory mCRC who received TAS‐102 (35 mg/m², twice a day) with (T‐B group) or without Bmab (TAS‐102 monotherapy; T group) between July 2014 and December 2018. The primary endpoint was median overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were median time to treatment failure, overall response rate, and the incidence of adverse events. Clinical outcomes were compared using propensity score matched analysis. Results. Data from 57 patients were analyzed (T‐B group: 21 patients, T group: 36 patients). Median OS was significantly longer in the T‐B group than the T group (14.4 months vs. 4.5 months, p < .001). Cox proportional hazard analysis showed that combination therapy with Bmab was significantly correlated with OS. Propensity score matched analysis confirmed that the median OS was significantly longer in the T‐B group than the T group (14.4 months vs. 6.1 months, p = .006) and that there was a significant correlation between Bmab and OS. The incidence of hypertension (grade ≥2) as an adverse event was significantly higher in the T‐B group than the T group (23.8% vs. 0.0%, p = .005), whereas other adverse events were comparable between the two groups. Conclusion. Treatment with Bmab in combination with TAS‐102 is significantly associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with mCRC refractory to standard therapies. Implications for Practice. Combining bevacizumab (Bmab) with TAS‐102 significantly improved overall survival and several prognostic indicators in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to standard therapies, with manageable toxicities. Treatment with Bmab in combination with TAS‐102 is significantly associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with mCRC.

Purpose Irinotecan is effective for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). SN-38 is an active metabolite of irinotecan, which is formed by carboxylesterase and inactivated by UDP-glucuronyltransferase (UGT) 1A1. The UGT enzyme activity is reduced in patients with homozygous mutation in UGT1A1 genes (*6/*6, *28/*28 and *6/*28); thus dose reduction is required for prevention of severe adverse events associated with irinotecan. The present study was designed to investigate the relationship between UGT1A1 polymorphisms and the incidence of adverse events or the therapeutic effect in mCRC patients who received irinotecan. Methods Sixty-three mCRC patients who received irinotecan during January 2014 and May 2018 were the subjects of this study. The incidence of adverse events, including diarrhea and neutropenia, and the therapeutic effect of irinotecan were compared among homozygous group, heterozygous group and wild-type group. The initial dose of irinotecan was 150 mg/m² in the heterozygous group and wild-type group, while the dose was reduced by 20% (120 mg/m²) in the homozygous group. Results The UGT1A1 polymorphisms occurred in 15.9%, 33.3%, and 50.8% for homozygous group, heterozygous group, and wild-type group, respectively. The average dose of irinotecan during overall cycles was not significantly different among three groups, despite the reduction of initial dose in homozygous group. There were no significant differences in the incidence rates of adverse events, tumor response, or time to treatment failure among three groups. Conclusion The present study demonstrated that dose reduction by 20% ensured safety and efficacy of irinotecan in mCRC patients with homozygous mutation in UGT1A1 genes.

Background: Outpatient cancer chemotherapy may lead to improved quality of life (QOL) by allowing treatment to continue without impairing the social lives of patients compared with hospitalization. However, the occurrence of serious adverse events may cause a decline in QOL. We investigated the relationship between outpatient chemotherapy–induced adverse events and QOL. Methods: A single-center retrospective descriptive study was conducted in patients who received outpatient chemotherapy at Gifu University Hospital (Gifu, Japan) between September 2017 and December 2018. The utility values of QOL, type and severity of adverse events, type of cancer, chemotherapy regimen, and other patient demographics were analyzed. Adverse events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. QOL was evaluated using the Japanese version of the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L). Associations between the EQ-5D-5L utility value and serious adverse events were assessed using adjusted (age and sex) odds ratios obtained with a proportional odds logistic regression model. Results: Data from 1008 patients who received 4695 chemotherapy cycles were analyzed. According to proportional odds logistic regression, the adverse events that significantly correlated with a decreased EQ-5D-5L utility value were malaise, edema of the limbs, peripheral neuropathy, pruritus, and dry skin. Based on the proportional odds logistic analysis, neither cancer type nor anticancer drugs were significantly correlated with the EQ-5D-5L utility value in patients who received chemotherapy. Pharmaceutical care for peripheral neuropathy significantly improved patients’ EQ-5D-5L utility value from 0.747 to 0.776 (P < 0.01). Conclusions: Adverse events (i.e., peripheral neuropathy, malaise, and edema of the limbs) are significantly correlated with a decrease in QOL, regardless of the type of cancer or anticancer drugs used. Pharmaceutical care provided by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians may improve QOL.

Background: The effect of pharmaceutical intervention to treat adverse events on quality of life (QOL) in outpatients receiving cancer chemotherapy is unclear. We investigated whether pharmaceutical intervention provided by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians improves QOL with outpatient cancer chemotherapy. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective descriptive study of pharmaceutical intervention for patients receiving outpatient cancer chemotherapy at Gifu University Hospital between September 2017 and July 2020. We assessed patient QOL using the Japanese version of the EuroQol 5 Dimension5 Level (EQ-5D-5L). Adverse events were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. We compared the EQ-5D-5L utility value and incidence of grade 2 or higher adverse events before and after pharmaceutical intervention. Results: Our analysis included 151 patients who underwent 210 chemotherapy cycles. Pharmaceutical intervention significantly improved patients’ EQ-5D-5L utility values from 0.8197 to 0.8603 (P < 0.01). EQ-5D-5L utility values were significantly improved after pharmaceutical intervention for nausea and vomiting (pre-intervention 0.8145, post-intervention 0.8603, P = 0.016), peripheral neuropathy (pre-intervention 0.7798, post-intervention 0.7988, P = 0.032) and pain (pre-intervention 0.7625, post-intervention 0.8197, P = 0.035). Although not statistically significant, the incidence of grade 2 or higher adverse events, including nausea and vomiting, dermopathy, pain, oral mucositis, diarrhea and dysgeusia, tended to be lower post-intervention than pre-intervention. Conclusions: Pharmaceutical intervention by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians may improve QOL in patients undergoing outpatient cancer chemotherapy.