Literature DB >> 2910422

A randomized study of inpatient versus outpatient continuous infusion chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer.

E E Vokes1, R L Schilsky, K E Choi, D M Magid, C M Guarnieri, S M Whaling, M J Ratain, R R Weichselbaum, W R Panje.   

Abstract

This study was designed to evaluate the safety, reliability, and patient acceptance of outpatient continuous intravenous infusion (CVI) chemotherapy. Twenty-two patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer received induction chemotherapy with methotrexate, cisplatin and a 5-day CVI of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Patients were randomized to receive the 5-FU portion of cycle 1 either by a standard inpatient CVI chemotherapy delivery device (standard pump) or by the Infusor (Baxter Healthcare Corporation, Deerfield, IL), a portable chemotherapy delivery system that provides a constant flow of drug over a period of 24 hours. For cycle 2, patients crossed over to the alternative drug delivery method. Patients receiving chemotherapy via the Infusor could choose to be either inpatients or outpatients. Daily plasma concentrations of 5-FU were determined during the first two cycles of chemotherapy. There was no significant difference in the mean steady state plasma 5-FU levels achieved with either drug delivery method (329.7 +/- 95.8 ng/ml for infusor cycles vs. 352.8 +/- 114.9 ng/ml for standard pump cycles). Clinical toxicities consisted primarily of mucositis for both methods of drug delivery. Eight patients declined to receive CVI chemotherapy as outpatients citing as reasons fear of malfunction of the device, inconvenience of the frequent clinic visits necessitated by daily monitoring of plasma 5-FU concentrations, and restrictions in daily home activities. Eleven patients underwent CVI chemotherapy via Infusor as outpatients. All reported outpatient CVI chemotherapy as convenient and effective and, when eligible, chose it again in subsequent cycles. A comparison of estimated costs revealed reductions in daily costs of +366.00 (+2,200.00 per cycle) for outpatient chemotherapy. Outpatient CVI chemotherapy is a reliable drug delivery method that was accepted by a majority of patients in this study. These factors may help to establish outpatient CVI chemotherapy as a viable alternative to hospitalization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2910422     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19890101)63:1<30::aid-cncr2820630105>3.0.co;2-m

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  12 in total

1.  Reducing cancer costs and improving quality through collaboration with payers: a proposal from the Florida society of clinical oncology.

Authors:  Thomas Marsland; Gerald Robbins; Alan Marks; Robert Cassell; Dorothy Green Philips; Kristen King
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 2.  Costs and benefits of outpatient therapy.

Authors:  E B Rubenstein
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  High-dose folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin on a weekly schedule in the treatment of advanced cancer of the head and neck.

Authors:  V Gebbia; A Russo; N Gebbia; L Rausa; F Ingria; G Spatafora; G Zerillo; A Cimino; T Pastorello; P Ferrara
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.553

4.  The cost-effectiveness of community-based screening for oral cancer in high-risk males in the United States: a Markov decision analysis approach.

Authors:  Raj C Dedhia; Kenneth J Smith; Jonas T Johnson; Mark Roberts
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Economic and patient-reported outcomes of outpatient home-based versus inpatient hospital-based chemotherapy for patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Eun-Hye Joo; Sun-Young Rha; Joong Bae Ahn; Hye-Young Kang
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-05-23       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  It appears to be safe to start chemotherapy on the day of implantation through subcutaneous venous port catheters in inpatient setting.

Authors:  Nuriye Yildirim Ozdemir; Hüseyin Abali; Berna Oksüzoğlu; Burçin Budakoğlu; Ilkay Akmangit; Nurullah Zengin
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-09-02       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Subcutaneous continuous infusion of ifosfamide and cyclophosphamide in ambulatory cancer patients: bioavailability and feasibility.

Authors:  T Cerny; A Graf; P Rohner; T Zeugin; K W Brunner; A Küpfer
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 4.553

8.  Plasma 5-fluorouracil and alpha-fluoro-beta-alanin accumulation in lung cancer patients treated with continuous infusion of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil.

Authors:  L Thiberville; P Compagnon; N Moore; G Bastian; M O Richard; M F Hellot; C Vincent; M M Kannass; S Dominique; C Thuillez
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.333

9.  Modified weekly cisplatin-based chemotherapy is acceptable in postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Hsueh-Ju Lu; Chao-Chun Yang; Ling-Wei Wang; Pen-Yuan Chu; Shyh-Kuan Tai; Ming-Huang Chen; Muh-Hwa Yang; Peter Mu-Hsin Chang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-02-22       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  Bioavailability and feasibility of subcutaneous 5-fluorouracil.

Authors:  M M Borner; J Kneer; C Crevoisier; K W Brunner; T Cerny
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.