Abstract 439P
Background
Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is one of the most common adverse events of capecitabine leading to treatment interruption or delay which may result in unfavorable oncologic outcomes. Topical urea cream could reduce degree of sorafenib induced hand-foot skin reaction. Although urea cream could not prevent HFS during early capecitabine use, the long-term results of urea cream for HFS prevention is limited. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of urea cream as a prophylaxis of HFS throughout the period of capecitabine use.
Methods
Cancer patients who received capecitabine at the dosage of at least 2,000 mg/m2/day for 14 days of the treatment cycle were randomized 1:1 to receive standard measures (avoid trauma of hands/feet and keep moisture) or urea-based cream (apply to hand/foot twice daily with standard measures) for HFS prevention. Incidence and severity of HFS were assessed by physician and by patient’s self-report at day 1 of every capecitabine cycle until 4-week following capecitabine discontinuation. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients who developed any grade HFS. Secondary endpoints include proportion of severe (> grade 3) HFS, modifications of capecitabine due to HFS and HFS onset.
Results
At median capecitabine cycle of 6, 68 out of 109 patients (62.4%) with standard measures and 60 out of 107 patients (56%) with urea cream reported any grade HFS (p=0.36). Grade 3 HFS was found in 52 (47.7%) and 44 patients (41.1%) receiving standard measures and urea cream, respectively (p=0.34). Capecitabine modification due to HFS was required in 20 patients (18.3%) with standard measures and 17 patients (15.9%) receiving urea cream prophylaxis (p=0.89). HFS resulting in capecitabine discontinuation rate and HFS onset were similar between two groups.
Conclusions
Urea-based cream could not prevent occurrence of capecitabine associated HFS, lessen HFS severity or reduce capecitabine modification as well as delay HFS onset. Topical urea cream as a HFS prophylactic measure is not routinely recommended for all patients receiving capecitabine.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
S. Ithimakin.
Funding
Siriraj hospital.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
602P - COLUMBUS 7-year update: A randomized, open-label, phase III trial of encorafenib (Enco) + binimetinib (Bini) vs vemurafenib (Vemu) or Enco in patients (Pts) with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma
Presenter: Andrew Haydon
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
603P - An individualised postoperative radiological surveillance schedule for IDH-wildtype glioblastoma patients (HK-GBM Registry)
Presenter: Jason Chak Yan Li
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
604P - Cabozantinib versus placebo in patients with radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer who progressed after prior VEGFR-targeted therapy: Outcomes from COSMIC-311 by BRAF status
Presenter: Marcia Brose
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
606P - BRAF and NRAS mutations are associated with poor prognosis in Asians with acral-lentiginous and nodular cutaneous melanoma
Presenter: Sumadi Lukman Anwar
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
607P - Single institutional outcomes of radiotherapy and systemic therapy for melanoma brain metastases in Japan
Presenter: Naoya Yamazaki
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
608P - The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy in mucosal melanomas: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presenter: Andrea Teo
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
609P - The association between thyroid function abnormalities and vitiligo induced by pembrolizumab regarding prognosis in patients with advanced melanoma
Presenter: Moez Mobarek
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
610P - Analyzing the clinical benefit of the evidence presented at these congresses and utilizing a standardized scale to quantify it will significantly enhance our understanding of the studies showcased, allowing for more objective evaluation and interpretation
Presenter: Charles Jeffrey Tan
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
611P - ESMO-magnitude of clinical benefit scale (MCBS) scores for phase III trials of adjuvant and curative therapies at the 2022 ASCO annual meeting (ASCO22)
Presenter: Thi Thao Vi Luong
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
612P - Is the juice worth the squeeze? Overall survival gain per unit treatment time as a metric of clinical benefit of systemic treatment in incurable cancers
Presenter: Vodathi Bamunuarachchi
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract