Implementation of capecitabine (Xeloda®) into a cancer centre: UK experience

Sustainability-based comparative stability of oxaliplatin plus leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil in infusion bags with application to plasma and colonic media samples

FOLFOX is widely used in the treatment of colon cancer. The combination of oxaliplatin (OXA), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and leucovorin (LV) is administrated according to strict protocols. Based on incompatibility studies, LV and OXA are supplied concurrently via intravenous infusion, followed by intravenous administration of 5-FU. This study aims at determining the stability of the binary mixture of OXA and LV diluted in infusion bags containing either 5% dextrose or normal saline compared with their single solutions besides single solutions of 5-FU at two temperatures (room temperature and refrigeration) for two weeks. HPLC diode array detection method was developed and validated to simultaneously determine the three drugs. Stability studies in 5% dextrose solution revealed that mixtures of OXA and LV kept at room temperature showed chemical degradation for OXA, with better stability for refrigerated solutions. Generally, single solutions showed considerable stability. Using normal saline, a combination of OXA/LV showed relative stability of LV over the 15 days of study with marked degradation of OXA. 5-FU was relatively stable in 5% dextrose and normal saline at both temperatures. Method's applicability was extended to the determination of the cited drugs in plasma and colonic media samples. Method's sustainability, blueness, and whiteness were investigated.

Conditions for the Implementation of a Patient Education Program Dedicated to Cancer Patients Treated by Oral Anticancer Therapy

INTRODUCTION

A patient education program has been developed in the field of cancer for supporting cancer patients undergoing oral anticancer therapies. Its implementation was tested in 3 different settings. The objectives of this study were to 1) identify barriers and facilitators for implementing the patient education program, 2) identify practices encouraging or hindering implementation and 3) produce recommendations for its dissemination.

METHODS

Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with caregivers from all three establishments.

RESULTS

The main factors associated with successful implementation were as follows: prescribers' representations on patient education, considered of low value; on oral anticancer therapies, considered too dangerous to be handled by the patient him/herself, the indefinite legitimacy of certain professions in charge of patient education programs; patients' engagement in their care pathway and provision of caregivers.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations include developing patient education culture within the environment of the medical doctors' curriculum, to consider contextual, pre-existing cooperative units for implementing patient education, to systematically send patients to patient education programs without practicing triage. Successful implementation of patient education critically depends on the prescribing physicians' perceived value of patient education. Patient education should become mandatory, integrated as part of the cancer care pathway. Physicians lack the necessary time and/or means to assess patients' capacity for engagement, without adequate strategies for their support. Therefore, physicians should systematically refer all patients to patient education, where nurses can tailor their coaching of cancer patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was approved by the IRB SUD EST I (N° EudraCT: 2016-A00113-48). All participants were given written and verbal information about the study and gave informed consent to participate.

Oral vinorelbine versus intravenous vinorelbine, in combination with epirubicin as first-line chemotherapy in Chinese patients with metastatic breast cancer

Oral VRL offers easier administration, better quality of life, and cost saving. This study aimed to evaluate the treatment efficacy in terms of tumor response of the two formulations of vinorelbine (VRL, oral and IV) in combination with epirubicin (EPI); and the effect of EPI co-administration on VRL pharmacokinetics (PK) in Chinese patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) using a phase 2, open label, randomized trial. Patients were aged 18–70 years, had histologically confirmed MBC, Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 70%, and life expectancy ≥ 12 weeks. The treatment consisted of 6 cycles of 3 weeks each. VRL dose was: (Oral-VRL) 60 mg/m² for cycle 1, 80 mg/m² for cycles 2–6, and (IV-VRL) 25 mg/m² for cycle 1 and 30 mg/m² for cycles 2–6. EPI dose of 75 mg/m² was given on day 1 in both arms for all cycles. 133 patients were enrolled: 66 in Oral-VRL and 67 in IV-VRL arms. The median age for Oral-VRL and IV-VRL arms was 48.4 and 50.0 years, respectively. Objective response rates were 50.0% (95% CI 37.4–62.6%) for Oral-VRL and 53.7% (95% CI 41.1–66.0%) for IV-VRL. Both treatment arms met the efficacy objective target of at least 31 responses, demonstrating efficacy as first-line treatment for MBC. Similar blood PK profiles, exposures, and VRL clearance were observed between VRL + EPI vs VRL-only modalities for both arms. Oral VRL is comparable to IV VRL and an effective first-line treatment for Chinese patients with MBC. The activity of VRL + EPI combination is unaltered when VRL is given orally at recommended doses.

A randomised, multicentre open-label phase II study to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus intravenous vinorelbine plus cisplatin in Chinese patients with chemotherapy-naive unresectable or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

Background

A phase II study to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of oral or intravenous vinorelbine (VRL) plus cisplatin (CDDP) in Chinese patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

One hundred and thirty-one patients were randomised to oral VRL 60 mg/m² (arm A) or intravenous VRL 25 mg/m² (arm B) on days 1 and 8, plus CDDP 80 mg/m² on day 1 (both arms). VRL was increased to 80 mg/m² (arm A) or 30 mg/m² (arm B) in cycles 2-4 in the absence of toxicity. Primary efficacy endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). VRL pharmacokinetics was evaluated for possible drug-drug interactions with CDDP.

Results

ORR was 25.8% in arm A and 23.1% in arm B. Disease control rate was 72.7% in arm A, 72.3% in arm B. Median overall survival was 16.1 months in arm A and 19.0 months in arm B. Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months in arm A and 4.9 months in arm B. Forty-three point nine percent and 86.2% of patients had grade 3/4 neutropenia in arms A and B, respectively; incidence of febrile neutropenia was low (6.1% and 9.2%, respectively). Frequency of grade 3/4 non-haematological adverse events was also low. VRL pharmacokinetics was not affected by co-administration of CDDP.

Conclusions

Oral and intravenous VRL in combination with CDDP is effective and well-tolerated in Chinese patients with advanced NSCLC. VRL pharmacokinetics is unaffected by CDDP co-administration. Oral VRL could be an effective alternative to intravenous VRL as a first-line treatment for NSCLC, as it optimises treatment convenience while maintaining high efficacy.

Increasing Access to Oral Anticancer Medicines in Middle-Income Countries: A Case Study of Private Health Insurance Coverage in Brazil

The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 60% of the world’s new annual cancer cases occur in Asia, Africa, and Central and South America, and that 70% of cancer deaths occur in these regions. Although oral chemotherapy is a promising intervention for cancer treatment, given its high cost, it is usually unavailable in middle-income countries. In 2013, after strong lobbying from civil society, Brazil's Congress passed legislation mandating that all private health insurance companies provide access to oral antineoplastic treatment. The decision to scale up the provision of oral chemotherapy was a watershed event in the regulation of private health insurance in Brazil. Until then, private insurers, which cover 25% of the population, were exempted from the provision of pharmaceutical drugs for home care treatments. This article explores the political process involved in regulating the provision of oral chemotherapy medicines by private health insurers. Elements of this successful advocacy case included investment in strategic communication, specialized knowledge of regulatory policy, and the ability to act via democratic channels of political representation. In turn, the receptiveness of government branches such as the Congress and regulating bodies, as well as the Cancer Awareness Month campaign, opened a window of opportunity. However, prospects for expanded access to such medicines in the public health system are bleak in the short term because of the ongoing political and economic crisis.

Is oral chemotherapy prescription safe for patients? A cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Oral chemotherapies are increasingly prescribed. Yet wide variations in prescription practices and in monitoring of toxicity have been underlined despite existing guidelines. There is little recent information available as regard to these practices. We aimed to obtain exhaustive information on oral chemotherapy prescription practices and safety monitoring in French hospitals.

METHODS

A cross-sectional multicentre survey was carried out to collect information on drug prescription, administration and surveillance: prescribing practices, coordination and monitoring of adherence, safety monitoring and side-effects occurrence prevention. Participants were a large sample of the French oncologists prescribing oral chemotherapy (20%).

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-seven oncologists from 112 hospitals (public, comprehensive cancer centres and private) replied (23.7% of cancer hospitals). The majority (56.1%) of the prescriptions were hand-written on a blank sheet. Eighty-four physicians (53.5%) included dose information and 36 (23%) declared having no monitoring procedures for adherence. Only 84 responders (54%) provided education material at first prescription of oral chemotherapy in way to limit avoidable side-effects. Sixty-one (39%) responders stated that they recalled at least one serious adverse event in the previous year declared in their centre.

CONCLUSIONS

In this 2012 study, the majority of prescribers followed no standards in prescription writing, safety monitoring and toxicity prevention. The implementation of the international recommendations for oral chemotherapy administration should be considered as a top priority-for both prescribers and health authorities-as regards to the dynamic of development of these molecules and their potential side-effects.

All-oral combination of vinorelbine and capecitabine as first-line treatment in HER2/Neu-negative metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of an all-oral vinorelbine and capecitabine combination therapy in anthracycline- ± taxane-pretreated HER2/Neu-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

METHODS

A phase 2 trial including women >18 years with HER2/Neu-negative MBC previously exposed to anthracycline- ± taxane-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. Enrolled patients received oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and oral capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 on a 3 weekly schedule. Patients with progressive disease after 3 cycles discontinued the study, while the remaining patients continued treatment for a maximum of 6 cycles.

RESULTS

From January 2007 to March 2011, 30 patients were enrolled in this study (median age 47 years). In the 28 evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 57.1 % (95 % CI 30-67 %), including 3 complete (10.7 %) and 13 partial (46.4 %) responses. Six (21.4 %) patients suffered from disease progression. With a median follow-up time of 13 months, the median time to disease progression was 8.6 months (95 % CI 6.2-10.6 months) and the median survival time was 27.2 months. Treatment-related adverse events were manageable, and no World Health Organization grade 4 toxicities were noted. Neutropenia observed in 6 (21.4 %) patients was the main grade 3 toxicity. Grade 3 nausea and vomiting were reported in 2 (7.1 %) and 3 (10.7 %) patients, respectively. Two (7.1 %) patients developed grade 3 hand and foot syndrome.

CONCLUSION

These results show that the combination of oral vinorelbine and capecitabine is an effective and well-tolerated first-line regimen for HER2/Neu-negative MBC patients pretreated with anthracyclines ± taxanes.

Acceptance of oral chemotherapy in breast cancer patients - a survey study

Background

Oral (p.o.) chemotherapy treatments gained increasing importance in the palliative treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Aim of this survey was to evaluate the acceptance of p.o. treatment and patients' individual attitudes towards it.

Methods

A specific 14 item-questionnaire was designed. Patients suffering from breast cancer receiving a newly launched p.o. or i.v. chemotherapy treatment were prospectively evaluated during 4 months of time. 224 questionnaires using descriptive statistics, chi-square test, Spearman correlation were evaluated.

Results

Patients' median age was 54 years, 164 received i.v., 60 p.o therapy. 89% with p.o. and 67% with i.v. regimens would choose p.o. over i.v. therapy, if equal efficacy is guaranteed. Significant differences were especially found in terms of personal benefit (55% i.v., 92% p.o.), reduced feeling of being ill due to p.o. treatment (26% i.v., 65% p.o.), better coping with disease due to p.o. therapy (36% i.v., 68% p.o.). Side effects were significantly less often reported under p.o. treatment (19% p.o. vs. 53% i.v.)

Conclusion

P.o. chemotherapy shows a high acceptance in MBC patients under palliative therapy. Compliance can be achieved in particular through a differentiated indication, patient education and competent support along a p.o. treatment.

Anticancer oral therapy: emerging related issues

The use of oral anticancer drugs has shown a steady increase. Most patients prefer anticancer oral therapy to intravenous treatment primarily for the convenience of a home-based therapy, although they require that the efficacy of oral therapy must be equivalent and toxicity not superior than those expected with the intravenous treatment. A better patient compliance, drug tolerability, convenience and possible better efficacy for oral therapy as compared to intravenous emerge as the major reasons to use oral anticancer agents among oncologists. Inter- and intra-individual pharmacokinetic variations in the bioavailability of oral anticancer drugs may be more relevant than for intravenous agents. Compliance is particularly important for oral therapy because it determines the dose-intensity of the treatment and ultimately treatment efficacy and toxicity. Patient stands as the most important determinant of compliance. Possible measures for an active and safe administration of oral therapy include a careful preliminary medical evaluation and selection of patients based on possible barriers to an adequate compliance, pharmacologic issues, patient-focused education, an improvement of the accessibility to healthcare service, as well as the development of home-care nursing symptom-focused interventions. Current evidences show similar quality of life profile between oral and intravenous treatments, although anticancer oral therapy seems to be more convenient in terms of administration and reduced time lost for work or other activities. Regarding cost-effectiveness, current evidences are in favor of oral therapy, mainly due to reduced need of visits and/or day in hospital for the administration of the drug and/or the management of adverse events.

Pharmacists' role in targeted cancer therapy in Australia and implications for pharmacy education

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the pharmacists' role in providing targeted therapies to patients and its implications for pharmacy education.

METHODS

Nine pharmacy faculty members, 12 clinical pharmacists, and 4 oncologists from across Australia and New Zealand participated in semistructured interviews, which were analysed using the framework method.

RESULTS

Education about targeted therapies was seen as being important, although content about pharmacodiagnostic tests was taught inconsistently among 7 universities. Issues including funding, clinical and diagnostic validity of tests, and time taken for turnaround of tests were perceived as impediments to the acceptance by clinicians of the utility of pharmacodiagnostic tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists may be the ideal professionals to interpret test results and provide counselling for patients to assist them in compliance with targeted cancer therapies. Pharmacy education in cancer therapies is critical to training pharmacists who can assist patients in the correct use of these therapies.

Cost analysis of capecitabine vs 5-fluorouracil-based treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer patients

The aim was to evaluate the cost of capecitabine vs conventional combination chemotherapics such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Italy. The study was a multicenter, retrospective longitudinal treatment-cost analysis. Patients older than 18 years, diagnosis of mCRC and at least 3 completed cycles of chemotherapy with oral capecitabine or 5-FU also in association with other chemotherapic agents were enrolled. Direct healthcare resources attributable to mCRC treatment were quantified using 2007 prices and tariffs. The analysis was conducted from the National Health Service perspective with a 6-month time horizon. A total of 231 patients affected by mCRC (55% males; mean age 63.7+/-10.31 yrs) were studied. Total direct costs per patient per month in capecitabine and 5-FU groups were euro1,001.66 +/- euro434.93 and euro3,172.81 +/- euro1,232.37 respectively (p<0.0001). Oral capecitabine therapy cost the health service less than intravenous therapies.

Global Lung Oncology Branch trial 3 (GLOB3): final results of a randomised multinational phase III study alternating oral and i.v. vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus docetaxel plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The study compared the efficacy of a first-line treatment with day 1 i.v. vinorelbine (NVBiv) and day 8 oral vinorelbine (NVBo) versus docetaxel (DCT) in a cisplatin-based combination in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, in terms of time to treatment failure (TTF), overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), tolerance and quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 80 mg/m2 with NVBiv 30 mg/m2 on day 1 and NVBo 80 mg/m2 on day 8 every 3 weeks, after a first cycle of NVBiv 25 mg/m2 on day 1 and NVBo 60 mg/m2 on day 8 (arm A) or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 and DCT 75 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks (arm B), for a maximum of six cycles in both arms.

RESULTS

From 2 February 2004 to 1 January 2006, 390 patients were entered in a randomised study and 381 were treated. The patient characteristics are as follows (arms A/B): metastatic (%) 80.5/84.8; patients with three or more organs involved (%) 45.3/40.8; median age 59.4/62.1 years; male 139/146; squamous (%) 34.2/33.5; adenocarcinoma (%) 41.6/39.3; median TTF (arms A/B in months) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 3.2 (3.0-4.2), 4.1 (3.4-4.5) (P = 0.19); overall response (arms A/B) (95% CI): 27.4% (21.2% to 34.2%), 27.2% (21.0% to 34.2%); median PFS (arms A/B in months) (95% CI): 4.9 (4.4-5.9), 5.1 (4.3-6.1) (P = 0.99) and median OS (arms A/B in months) (95% CI): 9.9 (8.4-11.6), 9.8 (8.8-11.5) (P = 0.58). The median survival for squamous histology was 8.87/9.82 months and for adenocarcinoma 11.73/11.60 months for arms A and B, respectively. Main haematological toxicity was grade 3-4 neutropenia: 24.4% (arm A) and 28.8% (arm B). QoL as measured by the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale was similar in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Both arms provided similar efficacy in terms of response, time-related parameters and QoL, with an acceptable tolerance profile. In the current Global Lung Oncology Branch trial 3, NVBo was shown to be effective as a substitute for the i.v. formulation. This can relieve the burden of the i.v. injection on day 8 and can optimise the hospital's resources and improve patient convenience.

Colon cancer: update on adjuvant therapy

Colon cancer is a public health problem worldwide. Although potentially curable at early stages, a substantial number of patients will inevitably present with or eventually develop metastatic disease, which is often incurable. Despite the progress achieved with the introduction of new cytotoxic agents, recurrence rates for patients with resected stage II/III disease remain > 20%. Therefore, a great deal of effort and resources have been put into improving early diagnosis and prevention tools as well as the efficacy of adjuvant treatment. Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is now considered the standard of care in node-positive colon cancer, but there remains controversy with regard to the indication and type of adjuvant treatment in patients with nodenegative disease. Oral fluoropyrimidines play a growing role in the management of colorectal cancer and can be currently considered an alternative to 5-fluorouracil. Numerous reports have suggested that elderly patients benefit equally from chemotherapy, but the growing numbers of octogenarian and nonagenarian patients in our clinics, many of whom occasionally struggle through treatment, are a reminder of the challenges ahead. Finally, as we might have reached a plateau in terms of cytotoxic chemotherapy, numerous clinical trials are now focusing on the role of biologic agents in the adjuvant setting.

Effective oral chemotherapy for breast cancer: pillars of strength

Traditionally, anticancer therapy has been dominated by intravenous drug therapy. However, oral agents provide an attractive approach to chemotherapy and use of oral treatments is increasing. We discuss the benefits and challenges of oral chemotherapy from the perspectives of patients, healthcare providers and healthcare funders. Important issues include patient preference, efficacy, compliance, bioavailability, reimbursement, use in special patient populations, financial and staff time savings and flexibility of dosing. We review data for traditional oral agents (e.g. cyclophosphamide, methotrexate), newer oral chemotherapies (e.g. capecitabine), oral formulations of traditionally intravenous agents (e.g. vinorelbine, idarubicin) and new biologic agents under evaluation in breast cancer (e.g. tyrosine kinase inhibitors). Lastly, we review studies of all-oral combination regimens. The wealth of data available and the increasing use of oral agents in breast cancer suggest that many of the concerns and perceptions about oral therapy, including efficacy and bioavailability, have been overcome, and that oral therapy will play a major role in breast cancer management in the future in both the metastatic and adjuvant settings.

A nurse-/pharmacy-led capecitabine clinic for colorectal cancer: Results of a prospective audit and retrospective survey of patient experiences

Oral chemotherapy agents provide patients with choice and home-based therapy but demand greater emphasis on patient support and education to minimise toxicities. To meet this demand, a nurse-/pharmacy-led clinic was established at the Beatson Oncology Centre in 2003 for the provision of oral capecitabine to metastatic colorectal cancer patients to provide a controlled and supportive environment. We conducted a prospective audit of 52 patients attending the clinic from March 2003 to June 2004 and a retrospective survey of patient experiences to assess clinic effectiveness. Of 52 patients, 79% completed at least 3 cycles of treatment (mean 3.5). Capecitabine was well tolerated. The dose was reduced on at least one occasion in 15 (29%) patients and 17 (30%) patients experienced at least one delay. Patient satisfaction, indicated by questionnaire responses (n=27), was high. Most patients (> or =85%) thought that the service provision was useful and well organised. The results indicate that a nurse-/pharmacy-led clinic for the provision of home-based oral capecitabine is safe, effective and acceptable to most patients. The success of this clinic can provide a model for use in other centres and in other types of cancer, such as breast cancer, where oral chemotherapy is a treatment option.

Les enjeux de l’observance pour les nouvelles chimiothérapies par voie orale : intérêt du modèle pharmacocinétique-pharmacodynamique

Nowadays, more and more oral anticancer chemotherapies are developed either for cytotoxic or new targeted drugs. But this relatively new route of administration in oncology drives to new problems in treatment management and particularly to non-compliance, i.e. the deviance of the actual way patients take their treatment with the prescription. Population PK-PD models and Monte-Carlo simulations allow to study the impact of non-compliance on toxicities. After a brief review on recent developments about oral chemotherapies, this work presents a simulation where non-compliance, modelled with a two state Markov chain defining four compliance profiles from excellent to poor, is linked to two dose-toxicity (continuous or categorical) population models. Simulated patients with the lowest compliance level were less exposed to treatment and therefore experienced less toxicity with shorter events. Nevertheless treatment efficacy is also lower, and this loss of efficacy may compromise patient's outcome. These results foresee the necessity of global simulations, combining compliance, toxicity and efficacy modelling.

Oral chemotherapy safety practices at US cancer centres: questionnaire survey

OBJECTIVE

To characterise current safety practices for the use of oral chemotherapy.

DESIGN

Written questionnaire survey of pharmacy directors of cancer centres.

SETTING

Comprehensive cancer centres in the United States.

RESULTS

Respondents from 42 (78%) of 54 eligible centres completed the survey, after consulting with 89 colleagues. Clinicians at 29 centres used handwritten prescriptions, two used preprinted paper prescriptions, and six used electronic systems for most oral chemotherapy prescribing. For six commonly used oral chemotherapies, on average 10 centres required a diagnosis on the prescription, 11 required the protocol number, four required the cycle number, nine required double checking by a second clinician, 14 required a calculation of body surface area, and 14 required a calculation of dose per square metre of body surface area. Only a third of centres requested patients' written informed consent when oral chemotherapy was given off protocol. Nearly a quarter (10) of centres had no formal process for monitoring patients' adherence. In the past year respondents at 10 centres reported at least one serious adverse drug event related to oral chemotherapy, and respondents at 13 centres reported a serious near miss.

CONCLUSION

Few of the safeguards routinely used for infusion chemotherapy have been adopted for oral chemotherapy at US cancer centres. There is currently no consensus at these centres about safe medication practices for oral chemotherapy.

Capecitabine: a new adjuvant option for colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer continues to pose a major public health threat in the United States. Without postsurgical adjuvant therapy, approximately 50% of patients will have recurrent disease and die within five years. Since 1990, five new chemotherapy agents have been added to the therapeutic armamentarium for management of colorectal cancer, and agents traditionally used to treat metastatic and advanced disease increasingly are being applied in the adjuvant setting. One such treatment, capecitabine, offers patients the benefit of oral dosing and permits at-home self-management. A phase III randomized trial, Xeloda in Adjuvant Colorectal Cancer Treatment, demonstrated that treatment with single-agent capecitabine was equivalent to bolus 5-fluorouracil with leucovorin with respect to disease-free survival and overall survival, with significantly less diarrhea, stomatitis, neutropenia, nausea and vomiting, and alopecia. This article reviews the findings and discusses how oncology nurses can help provide effective education and monitoring for patients using oral treatment in the adjuvant setting.

Current directions for COX-2 inhibition in breast cancer

Chemotherapy is effective against breast cancer. COX-2 has been implicated in the progression and angiogenesis of cancers. Celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase type 2 (COX-2) inhibitor, has both apoptotic and antiangiogenic activities, and may be of use in treatment of breast tumors which overexpress the COX-2 enzyme. Preliminary clinical trials have shown that the combination of chemotherapy with celecoxib has minimal additional toxicity and it may enhance the effects of the chemotherapy. Beside chemotherapy, celecoxib may promulgate the effect of aromatase inhibitor in breast cancer cells. Animal studies have shown that there are fewer and smaller tumors treated by combining exemestane and celecoxib. Larger clinical trials should be initiated to study the potential anti-cancer effects of celecoxib in breast cancer.

The vital role of education and information in patients receiving capecitabine (Xeloda)

Use of oral capecitabine (Xeloda) as home-based therapy leads to savings in healthcare resources and costs and oral chemotherapy is preferred by many cancer patients over intravenous (i.v.) 5-FU. The demands of patient management for oral therapy differ significantly from those of i.v. chemotherapy. Consequently, cancer programmes have begun to implement strategies to meet these unique demands, offer educational programmes for clinicians who prescribe capecitabine, and consider potential changes in staff responsibilities. To encourage patients to take an active part in their care, which is vital with home-based oral therapy, they must be properly informed about their treatment. Patient information needs to be specific for the cancer type and relevant for the country. Various tools have been developed, including prescription guides, diary cards and support kits, which are useful in reinforcing verbal discussions about the use of capecitabine and in helping patients to manage their treatment. Nurses have a vital role to play in encouraging the optimal use of capecitabine and prompt management of adverse events, thereby enabling the patient to achieve a better clinical outcome and maintain an improved quality of life in the home environment.

Implications of capecitabine (Xeloda®) for cancer nursing practice

Home-based therapy with oral capecitabine (Xeloda) has a number of advantages over i.v. hospital-based chemotherapy regimens, including improvement in patients' quality of life, and medical resource/cost savings compared with 5-FU/LV in metastatic colorectal cancer. In addition, the ability of capecitabine to extend survival beyond docetaxel in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer means that capecitabine plus docetaxel is a very cost-effective combination. Oncology nurses should prepare for the increased use of oral capecitabine as a single agent or in combination regimens in the outpatient setting. The use of this drug requires enhanced patient education skills, communication (e.g. telephone contact) and patient management on the part of the nurse. Oncology nurses will also need to accept a more significant and pivotal role in the clinical oncology team, not only as a point of contact between the patient and clinician, but also in documenting the benefits of capecitabine to ensure the effective management of patients receiving the drug.