Retrospective review of pemetrexed with or without platinum in malignant mesothelioma: The Australian 'Special Access Scheme' experience

Background: Pemetrexed and cisplatin have recently been shown to significantly improve survival compared with cisplatin alone. However, there are only limited data reflecting teaching hospital experience outside a clinical trial. Pemetrexed has only been available in Australia on a restricted basis since 2002. We reviewed our experience of patients treated on the Australian ‘Special Access Scheme’ at three major thoracic oncology units. Methods: Charts were reviewed for all patients enrolled on the scheme. Data was extracted on age, World Health Organization (WHO) performance status, histology, prior therapy, time from diagnosis to starting pemetrexed, chemotherapy (pemetrexed alone or with a platinum), cycle number, response rate, actuarial progression‐free and overall survival. Doses were cisplatin 75 mg/m² or carboplatin AUC = 5 and pemetrexed 500 mg/m² every 21 days. Results: 52 patients (32 male and 20 female) were reviewed. Median age was 58 years and 88% were WHO 0–1. Histology included 54% epithelial, 17% biphasic (epithelial and sarcomatoid) and 21% undefined. The median time from diagnosis to administration of pemetrexed was 145 days. Sixty‐five percent had minimal surgical intervention with video assisted thoracoscopy, pleurodesis and biopsy, while 19% had received prior palliative radiation. Seventy‐one percent were chemotherapy naïve, the remaining 29% having received previous platinum and/or gemcitabine regimens. Twenty‐three percent had pemetrexed alone, 35% in combination with carboplatin and 42% with cisplatin. The median number of cycles was 4 (range 1–13). The response rate was 33%. No toxicity was observed in 20% grade 3–4 toxicity in 10% (majority nausea/vomiting). The median progression‐free and overall survival times from starting pemetrexed were 184 days and 298 days, respectively. Conclusions: Pemetrexed‐based regimens are safe and effective in a community setting in malignant mesothelioma.     

Diarrhea in liver transplant recipients: etiology and management.

Diarrhea is common after liver transplantation (LT). The true incidence of diarrhea in liver transplant recipients is unknown but possibly ranges from 10% to 43% based on a few published studies in other solid organ and bone marrow transplantation. Infectious etiologies, including cytomegalovirus (CMV), Clostridium difficile, and occasional atypical intestinal infections, are the most common causes. Diarrhea is also a frequent side effect of immunosuppressive medications. To variable extents, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), cyclosporine A (CSA), tacrolimus, and sirolimus are all known to be associated with diarrhea. Rarely, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), lymphoproliferative disorder, de novo inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), or colon cancer may present as diarrhea. Flare-up of preexisting IBD is also not uncommon after LT. However, the cause of acute diarrhea remains unidentified in 1 of 3 patients. This review summarizes the literature and provides recommendations on the management of acute diarrhea after LT. Although our focus is on LT, the etiology and management recommendations apply to most transplant recipients.