Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

4115 - Safety and effectiveness of sensor-controlled scalp cooling in women receiving chemotherapy for primary breast cancer

Date

10 Sep 2017

Session

Poster display session

Topics

Supportive Care and Symptom Management;  Breast Cancer

Presenters

Christian Kurbacher

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v543-v567. 10.1093/annonc/mdx388

Authors

C.M. Kurbacher, S. Herz, G. Kolberg, N. Kettelhoit, A.T. Kurbacher, C. Schweitzer, J.A. Kurbacher

Author affiliations

  • Gynecologic Oncology, Gynecologic Center Bonn-Friedensplatz, 53111 - Bonn/DE
More

Resources

Abstract 4115

Background

Sensor-controlled scalp cooling (SCSC) to prevent chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) in patients (pts) with primary breast cancer (PBC) is approved by the FDA. However, SCSC isl infrequently used in many countries due to concerns regarding both safety and feasibility. This retrospective analysis sought to obtain more detailed information about the effectiveness and safety of SCSC using the Paxman system (Paxman, Huddersfield, UK) in PBC pts exposed to neoadjuvant (NACT) or adjuvant Ctx (ACT) in the clinical routine.

Methods

79 pts were identified from our database: NACT, 41 (51.9%); ACT, 38 (48.1%); dose-dense (dd) Ctx, 56 (70.9%); non-dd Ctx 23 (29.1%); premenopausal, 44 (55.7%); postmenopausal, 35 (44.3%). The following Ctx regimens were used: anthracycline-based (A), 1 (1.3%); taxane-based (T), 21 (26.6%); AT-based, 55 (69.6%); non AT-based, 2 (2.5%). Pts were subjected to SCSC during each Ctx cycle. CIA was quantified using the Dean score (DS) determined 3 wks after the last Ctx cycle. Data were analyzed regarding the SCSC completion rate, quality of hair preservation (success: DS 0-2, failure: DS 3-4), reasons of SCSC discontinuation, and toxicity. Moreover, the following parameters were investigated in regard to the success of SCSC: menopausal status, NACT vs ACT, dd Ctx vs non-dd Ctx, AT-based Ctx vs A-/T- or non-AT-based Ctx.

Results

55 pts (69.6%) completed SCSC with 36 (45.6%) showing complete (DS 0), and 19 (22.8%) showing partial success (DS 1-2). 24 pts (30.4%) discontinued SCSC with CIA seen in 18 pts (22.8%). Headache and local discomfort (“feeling cold”) were reported in 4 pts (5.1%) each. Side effects were all not severe and resolved quickly after cessation of SCSC. SCSC was equally effective in all analyzed subgroups. The relative risk (RR) to experience CIA was 1.11 (CI: 0.82-1.54) for post- vs premenopausal pts; 1.11 (CI: 0.83-1.53) for ACT vs NACT; 1.31 (CI: 0.96-1.72) for AT vs other Ctx protocols, and 0.99 (CI 0.72-1.43) for dd Ctx vs non-dd Ctx.

Conclusions

In our study, SCSC was safe and effective to prevent CIA in PBC pts. The success rate in our study is in good agreement to previous randomized trials of SCSC in PBC arguing in favor that SCSC is a valuable supportive treatment in the clinical routine.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Christian M. Kurbacher

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.