No abstract

Introduction. Colorectal cancer (CRC) and its treatments can cause distressing sequelae. We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial aiming to improve psychological distress, supportive care needs (SCNs), and quality of life (QOL) of patients with CRC. The intervention, called SurvivorCare (SC), comprised educational materials, needs assessment, survivorship care plan, end‐of‐treatment session, and three follow‐up telephone calls. Methods. At the end of treatment for stage I–III CRC, eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to usual care (UC) or to UC plus SC. Distress (Brief Symptom Inventory 18), SCNs (Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs measure), and QOL (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] QOL questionnaires C30 and EORTC CRC module CR29) were assessed at baseline and at 2 and 6 months (follow‐up 1 [FU1] and FU2, respectively). The primary hypothesis was that SC would have a beneficial effect on distress at FU1. The secondary hypotheses were that SC would have a beneficial effect on (a) SCN and QOL at FU1 and on (b) distress, SCNs, and QOL at FU2. A total of 15 items assessed experience of care. Results. Of 221 patients randomly assigned, 4 were ineligible for the study and 1 was lost to FU, leaving 110 in the UC group and 106 in the SC group. Patients’ characteristics included the following: median age, 64 years; men, 52%; colon cancer, 56%; rectal cancer, 35%; overlapping sites of disease, 10%; stage I disease, 7%; stage II, 22%; stage III, 71%. Baseline distress and QOL scores were similar to population norms. Between‐group differences in distress at FU1 (primary outcome) and at FU2, and SCNs and QOL at FU1 and FU2 were small and nonsignificant. Patients in the SC group were more satisfied with survivorship care than those in the UC group (significant differences on 10 of 15 items). Conclusion. The addition of SC to UC did not have a beneficial effect on distress, SCNs, or QOL outcomes, but patients in the SC group were more satisfied with care. Implications for Practice: Some survivors of colorectal cancer report distressing effects after completing treatment. Strategies to identify and respond to survivors’ issues are needed. In a randomized controlled trial, the addition of a nurse‐led supportive care package (SurvivorCare) to usual post‐treatment care did not impact survivors’ distress, quality of life, or unmet needs. However, patients receiving the SurvivorCare intervention were more satisfied with survivorship care. Factors for consideration in the design of subsequent studies are discussed.

Summary:We describe the risk factors for and the natural history and response to treatment of extramedullary (EM) relapse in 183 patients who underwent allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (alloBMT) for a variety of haematological malignancies at our institution over a 7. year period. Fifty-one patients relapsed; 15 had EM relapse either alone or in association with marrow involvement. A retrospective analysis found that the presence of chronic GVHD and a longer interval between transplant and relapse were independently associated with an increased risk of EM compared to marrow-only relapse. EM relapse was also associated with a longer post-relapse survival. Patients with EM relapse appeared to respond to cytotoxic therapy but not to DLI. EM relapse after alloBMT may be more common than previously thought and have a better prognosis than marrow-only relapse. While patients developing chronic GVHD after alloBMT have a lower overall relapse risk than those who do not, they may be more prone to delayed relapse at EM sites. Bone Marrow Transplantation (2000) 26, 1011-1015. Keywords: allogeneic bone marrow transplantation; extramedullary relapse; graft-versus-host disease; donor lymphocyte infusion Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (alloBMT) is potentially curative therapy for haematological malignancies including acute leukaemia, myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), and chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML). 1-3 However, 30-50% of patients transplanted for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) beyond first remission eventually relapse -usually within 12 months. 4 The post-transplant relapse rate for advanced acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) is higher, and accelerated phase CML carries a relapse risk of up to 60%. 2,3 Disease relapse is usually in the bone marrow, but some patients develop extramedullary (EM) relapse either alone, or in association with marrow relapse. EM relapse after alloBMT has been thought to be rare and the prognosis relatively poor. A survey conducted by the European Group Little is known about predisposing factors, natural history and response to treatment of EM as compared to marrow relapse. We addressed these issues in a retrospective analysis of a cohort of patients with relapsed haematological malignancy following alloBMT. In this analysis, hepatosplenomegaly and lymphadenopathy were not considered manifestations of extramedullary disease. Leptomeningeal disease was not considered extramedullary unless positive cerebrospinal fluid cytology was accompanied by a structural lesion on radiological imaging.

The CNS relapse rate in this cohort of patients with primary DLBCL was low at 1.1%. This retrospective analysis demonstrates in a homogeneous group of DLBCL patients that a relatively low-intensity IT chemoprophylaxis regimen given according to site-based risk can be associated with a low risk of CNS relapse.

No abstract