Nilgun Yildirim1, Mahir Cengiz2. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Firat University School of Medicine, Elazıg, Turkey. drnilgunsari@yahoo.com. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Biruni University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to identify potential clinical parameters that can be easily obtained by a pre-treatment clinicopathological evaluation and whole blood test to estimate the development of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy (OIPN). METHODS: This study was conducted retrospectively. For the FOLFOX regimen, patients received oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m2, every 2 weeks for 12 courses, and with the XELOX regimen, oxaliplatin was 130 mg/m2, every 3 weeks for 6-8 courses. The incidence and degree of neuropathy (NCI-CTCAE v.3) were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included in the study. There were 108 (58%) patients in the grade 0-1 (G0-G1) neuropathy group (mean age 50.5 ± 11.5; 63% men), and 78 (42%) patients in the grade 2-3 (G2-G3) neuropathy group (mean age 58.0 ± 10.8; 46.2% men). The relationship between G2-G3 OIPN development and age (p < 0.001), gender (p = 0.02), and ECOG performance status (p = 0.007) was statistically significant. In the G2-G3 neuropathy group, serum gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) (p < 0.001) and glucose (p = 0.007) levels were higher, whereas vitamin D (p < 0.001), hemoglobin (Hgb) (p < 0.001), serum albumin (p = 0.001), and serum magnesium (p = 0.035) levels were lower compared with the G0-G1 neuropathy group. G2-G3 neuropathy was observed in 88% of patients with mucinous carcinoma pathologic type (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that age, histopathologic type, albumin, GGT, glucose, vitamin D, and Hgb levels were the effective factors in prediction of the development of OIPN. In addition, GGT, vitamin D, and Hgb levels were the most effective factor to predict development of OIPN.
PURPOSE: We aimed to identify potential clinical parameters that can be easily obtained by a pre-treatment clinicopathological evaluation and whole blood test to estimate the development of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy (OIPN). METHODS: This study was conducted retrospectively. For the FOLFOX regimen, patients received oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m2, every 2 weeks for 12 courses, and with the XELOX regimen, oxaliplatin was 130 mg/m2, every 3 weeks for 6-8 courses. The incidence and degree of neuropathy (NCI-CTCAE v.3) were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included in the study. There were 108 (58%) patients in the grade 0-1 (G0-G1) neuropathy group (mean age 50.5 ± 11.5; 63% men), and 78 (42%) patients in the grade 2-3 (G2-G3) neuropathy group (mean age 58.0 ± 10.8; 46.2% men). The relationship between G2-G3 OIPN development and age (p < 0.001), gender (p = 0.02), and ECOG performance status (p = 0.007) was statistically significant. In the G2-G3 neuropathy group, serum gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) (p < 0.001) and glucose (p = 0.007) levels were higher, whereas vitamin D (p < 0.001), hemoglobin (Hgb) (p < 0.001), serum albumin (p = 0.001), and serum magnesium (p = 0.035) levels were lower compared with the G0-G1 neuropathy group. G2-G3 neuropathy was observed in 88% of patients with mucinous carcinoma pathologic type (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that age, histopathologic type, albumin, GGT, glucose, vitamin D, and Hgb levels were the effective factors in prediction of the development of OIPN. In addition, GGT, vitamin D, and Hgb levels were the most effective factor to predict development of OIPN.
Entities:
Keywords:
Gastrointestinal system cancers; Oxaliplatin; Peripheral neuropathy; Toxicity; Treatment
Authors: James Wang; Kyle A Udd; Aleksandra Vidisheva; Regina A Swift; Tanya M Spektor; Eric Bravin; Emad Ibrahim; Jonathan Treisman; Mohammed Masri; James R Berenson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Marta Seretny; Gillian L Currie; Emily S Sena; Sabrina Ramnarine; Robin Grant; Malcolm R MacLeod; Leslie A Colvin; Marie Fallon Journal: Pain Date: 2014-09-23 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Fiona Streckmann; Eva M Zopf; Helmar C Lehmann; Kathrin May; Julia Rizza; Philipp Zimmer; Albert Gollhofer; Wilhelm Bloch; Freerk T Baumann Journal: Sports Med Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Rebecca M Speck; Angela DeMichele; John T Farrar; Sean Hennessy; Jun J Mao; Margaret G Stineman; Frances K Barg Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Giorgio V Scagliotti; Cornelius Kortsik; Graham G Dark; Allan Price; Christian Manegold; Rafael Rosell; Mary O'Brien; Patrick M Peterson; Daniel Castellano; Giovanni Selvaggi; Silvia Novello; Johannes Blatter; Louis Kayitalire; Lucio Crino; Luis Paz-Ares Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2005-01-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Bruno Vincenzi; Anna Maria Frezza; Gaia Schiavon; Chiara Spoto; Nicola Silvestris; Raffaele Addeo; Vincenzo Catalano; Francesco Graziano; Daniele Santini; Giuseppe Tonini Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-11-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Angélica S Reis; Carolina C Martins; Ketlyn P da Motta; Jaini J Paltian; Gabriel P Costa; Diego Alves; Cristiane Luchese; Ethel Antunes Wilhelm Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2022-01-13 Impact factor: 5.590
Authors: David Mizrahi; Susanna B Park; Tiffany Li; Hannah C Timmins; Terry Trinh; Kimberley Au; Eva Battaglini; David Wyld; Robert D Henderson; Peter Grimison; Helen Ke; Peter Geelan-Small; Julie Marker; Brian Wall; David Goldstein Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-02-01