Abstract 274P
Background
PN is a critical factor resulting in premature treatment discontinuation. No satisfactory prophylactic therapy exists. Currently used FG are partially efficient but they are impractical, bulky and painful. Encouraging results using SG to prevent PN in women receiving paclitaxel (P) have been published. We therefore investigated medium- and long term-efficacy of SG vs FG to prevent PN.
Methods
This prospective comparative, auto-controlled study included >18y patients (pts) with breast cancer receiving weekly P treatment (12 cycles). During each cycle, pts wore SG on the dominant hand and FG on their other hand. SG were used in pair, one on top of the other: the first one of 1/2 size smaller, the second 1 size smaller. Primary objective was to evaluate patient satisfaction at the end of P treatment using 10-point numeric scale (10p-NS). Secondary objectives included efficacy (reported as rates of pts with PN before each cycle, at P discontinuation, and 1 year after P discontinuation) and assessed patient comfort and pain using 10p-NS and nurse preference. A total of 84 pts was required to identify a 2-point difference in satisfaction with 2-sided paired Student t-test (α: 5%; β:5%).
Results
Between September 2019 and December 2020, 94 pts were included. The median P dose received/cycle was 79 [65-84] mg/m2 for a median of 12 [4-12] cycles, during a median duration of 64 [60-185] minutes. 21 pts required at least one PN-related dose modification. Median overall satisfaction was statistically increased (SG: 9/10 vs FG:6/10; p<0.001) with increased comfort (8/10 vs 5/10; p<0.001) and less pain (1/10 vs 4/10; p<0.001). Moreover, less patients reported at least 1 PN (66% vs 68%; p=0.7539) and at least 1 grade ≥2 PN (18% vs 28%; p=0.0117). Whereas FG were easier to wear (9/10) vs 8/10 for SG (p<0.001), nurses preferred SG requiring less surveillance. No impact on onycholysis rate was observed.
Conclusions
Compression therapy with SG is effective to reduce paclitaxel-induced PN and met patient satisfaction. PN prevention is easy to implement. These results contribute to better prevent PN and to improve patient quality of life during and after chemotherapy.
Legal entity responsible for the study
Centre Léon Bérard.
Funding
Centre Léon Bérard, GIRCI AURA (Groupement Inter-régional de Recherche Clinique et d’Innovation), AFIC (Association Françaises des Infirmier(e)s de Cancérologie). Gloves supplied free by Ansell.
Disclosure
P. Heudel: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Seagen, Lilly, MSD, Gilead; Financial Interests, Personal, Ownership Interest: GEODAISICS. T. Bachelot: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: Lilly; Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Novartis, Roche, AstraZeneca, Seagen, Pfizer; Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Roche; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca; Non-Financial Interests, Principal Investigator: Roche, AstraZeneca. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.