Citations

SummaryThe rituximab extended schedule or retreatment trial (RESORT; E4402) was a phase 3 randomized prospective trial comparing maintenance rituximab (MR) versus a retreatment (RR) dosing strategy in asymptomatic, low tumour burden indolent lymphoma. A planned exploratory sub‐study compared the two strategies for small lymphocytic (SLL) and marginal zone lymphomas (MZL). Patients responding to rituximab weekly × 4 were randomized to MR (single dose rituximab every 3 months until treatment failure) or RR (rituximab weekly × 4) at the time of each progression until treatment failure. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTTF). Patients with SLL (n = 57), MZL (n = 71) and unclassifiable small B‐cell lymphoma (n = 3) received induction rituximab. The overall response rate (ORR) was 40% [95% confidence interval (CI) 31–49%; SLL ORR 22·8%; MZL ORR 52·1%]; all 52 responders were randomized. At a median of 4·3 years from randomization, treatment failure occurred in 18/23 RR and 15/29 MR. The median TTTF was 1·4 years for RR and 4·8 years for MR (P = 0·012); median time to first cytotoxic therapy was 6·3 years for RR and not reached for MR (P = 0·0002). Survival did not differ (P = 0·72). In low tumour burden SLL and MZL patients responding to rituximab induction, MR significantly improved TTTF as compared with RR.

PurposeThe effects of ovarian function suppression (OFS) on survival and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated in a phase III trial in which premenopausal women were randomly assigned to tamoxifen with or without OFS.Patients and MethodsPremenopausal women with axillary node-negative, hormone receptor–positive breast cancer tumors measuring ≤ 3 cm were randomly assigned to tamoxifen alone versus tamoxifen plus OFS; adjuvant chemotherapy was not permitted. Primary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included toxicity and patient-reported outcomes. Patient-reported outcome data included health-related quality of life, menopausal symptoms, and sexual function. These were evaluated at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and then annually for up to 5 years after registration.ResultsIn all, 345 premenopausal women were enrolled: 171 on tamoxifen alone and 174 on tamoxifen plus OFS. With a median follow-up of 9.9 years, there was no significant difference between arms for DFS (5-year rate: 87.9% v 89.7%; log-rank P = .62) or OS (5-year rate: 95.2% v 97.6%; log-rank P = .67). Grade 3 or higher toxicity was more common in the tamoxifen plus OFS arm (22.4% v 12.3%; P = .004). Patients treated with tamoxifen plus OFS had more menopausal symptoms, lower sexual activity, and inferior health-related quality of life at 3-year follow-up (P < .01 for all). Differences diminished with further follow-up.ConclusionWhen added to tamoxifen, OFS results in more menopausal symptoms and sexual dysfunction, which contributes to inferior self-reported health-related quality of life. Because of early closure, this study is underpowered for drawing conclusions about the impact on survival when adding OFS to tamoxifen.

Purpose The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the role of radiation therapy with concurrent gemcitabine (GEM) compared with GEM alone in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with localized unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (at 1,000 mg/m 2 /wk for weeks 1 to 6, followed by 1 week rest, then for 3 of 4 weeks) or GEM (600 mg/m 2 /wk for weeks 1 to 5, then 4 weeks later 1,000 mg/m 2 for 3 of 4 weeks) plus radiotherapy (starting on day 1, 1.8 Gy/Fx for total of 50.4 Gy). Measurement of quality of life using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Hepatobiliary questionnaire was also performed. Results Of 74 patients entered on trial and randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (arm A; n = 37) or GEM plus radiation (arm B; n = 34), patients in arm B had greater incidence of grades 4 and 5 toxicities (41% v 9%), but grades 3 and 4 toxicities combined were similar (77% in A v 79% in B). No statistical differences were seen in quality of life measurements at 6, 15 to 16, and 36 weeks. The primary end point was survival, which was 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.9 to 11.4 months) and 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 15.5 months) for arms A and B, respectively (one-sided P = .017 by stratified log-rank test). Conclusion This trial demonstrates improved overall survival with the addition of radiation therapy to GEM in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer, with acceptable toxicity.

Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in the general medical hospital setting spend approximately half of their time providing swallowing services. Other professions, including occupational therapists (OTs) and dietitians, promote themselves as disciplines well suited to assist patients with dysphagia. Responses to a survey distributed by the American Speech-Language-Hearing-Association (ASHA) in 2007 indicated that 83% of SLPs working in hospitals believed encroachment and defining professional boundaries was a problem. The highest level of personal experience with encroachment was with occupational therapy. Effective 2009, the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA) began offering Specialty Certification in Feeding, Eating and Swallowing (SCFES) to OTs and OTAs who meet specific educational and clinical experience requirements. This article reviews the many reasons why SLPs are the professionals best suited for assisting patients with swallowing disorders. It provides specific strategies to assist SLPs in promoting our discipline as the providers of dysphagia services.