Breast cancer survivors in this study encountered some problems in returning to work, mainly linked to the sequelae of their disease and its treatment rather than to discrimination by employers or colleagues.

Purpose: The off-label (OL) use of antineoplastic drugs for the treatment of various types of tumors in patients of different disease stages is becoming a common occurrence. The objective of this study was to analyze these patterns by quantification and characterization of the OL use of antineoplastic drugs and their level of scientific evidence in a medium/high-complexity Spanish general university hospital.Method: All oncology patients who underwent OL treatment with one or several antineoplastics during the 10 years from 2002 to 2012 were retrospectively selected. The use of these drugs was considered OL if they were used for indications, stages, lines of treatment, or chemotherapy schemes not reflected in the summary of product characteristics published by the European Medicines Agency at the time of prescription. To calculate the prevalence of patients who received one or more OL treatments during the study period, all patients whose primary or secondary diagnosis had been coded with the diagnoses included in the study were selected through the minimum basic data set (MBDS). This database was cross-referenced with that of the Farmatools® program (Dominion®), which collects information on all patients receiving chemotherapy to obtain the total number of patients who received chemotherapy in the hospital during this period.Results: In total, 684 patients and 866 OL treatments were included. The prevalence of patients undergoing OL treatment with antineoplastics was 6%. OL treatments were used mainly for breast, gynecological, lung, and gastric tumors. The most often-used antineoplastic was paclitaxel, followed by gemcitabine, carboplatin, vinorelbine, and capecitabine, which were used mainly in monotherapy and with palliative intent. A total of 56.1% of the OL schemes used had a level of evidence of 2A according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and 55.3% had a level of evidence of 2B according to Micromedex®.Conclusion: The OL use of antineoplastics in oncology patients is limited; their use is mainly focused in a small group of tumors and at advanced stages of disease. OL use of antineoplastics occurs under palliative therapeutic strategies with a limited number of drugs, preferably off-patent drugs. In addition, these OL treatments have high levels of clinical evidence.

ImportancePeritoneal metastasis in patients with locally advanced colon cancer (T4 stage) is estimated to recur at a rate of approximately 25% at 3 years from surgical resection and is associated with poor prognosis. There is controversy regarding the clinical benefit of prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in these patients.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of intraoperative HIPEC in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial was conducted in 17 Spanish centers from November 15, 2015, to March 9, 2021. Enrolled patients were aged 18 to 75 years with locally advanced primary colon cancer diagnosed preoperatively (cT4N02M0).InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive cytoreduction plus HIPEC with mitomycin C (30 mg/m2 over 60 minutes; investigational group) or cytoreduction alone (comparator group), both followed by systemic adjuvant chemotherapy. Randomization of the intention-to-treat population was done via a web-based system, with stratification by treatment center and sex.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was 3-year locoregional control (LC) rate, defined as the proportion of patients without peritoneal disease recurrence analyzed by intention to treat. Secondary end points were disease-free survival, overall survival, morbidity, and rate of toxic effects.ResultsA total of 184 patients were recruited and randomized (investigational group, n = 89; comparator group, n = 95). The mean (SD) age was 61.5 (9.2) years, and 111 (60.3%) were male. Median duration of follow-up was 36 months (IQR, 27-36 months). Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups. The 3-year LC rate was higher in the investigational group (97.6%) than in the comparator group (87.6%) (log-rank P = .03; hazard ratio [HR], 0.21; 95% CI, 0.05-0.95). No differences were observed in disease-free survival (investigational, 81.2%; comparator, 78.0%; log-rank P = .22; HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.41-1.22) or overall survival (investigational, 91.7%; comparator, 92.9%; log-rank P = .68; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.26-2.37). The definitive subgroup with pT4 disease showed a pronounced benefit in 3-year LC rate after investigational treatment (investigational: 98.3%; comparator: 82.1%; log-rank P = .003; HR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.70). No differences in morbidity or toxic effects between groups were observed.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, the addition of HIPEC to complete surgical resection for locally advanced colon cancer improved the 3-year LC rate compared with surgery alone. This approach should be considered for patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02614534