• Sangram Vurumadla


Objective: The aim was to determine the prevalence, clinical presentation, treatment pattern, outcomes and adverse drug reactions of the treatment
regimen in gynecological cancer patients.
Methods: This is a prospective observational study conducted at St. Ann’s Cancer Hospital, Warangal, Telangana State, from January 2014 to
September 2014. 100 patients of gynecological cancer admitted in the hospital were divided into three groups, i.e. breast, cervical and ovarian
cancer. Patients receiving chemotherapy (CT) were interviewed for information on type of adverse effects (AE) and the other pertinent information
such as demographics, diagnosis, treatment pattern, drugs used to manage the AE were collected from the patient’s medical records. The data were
categorized based on the type of cancers and AE of therapy.
Results: A total of 50 patients were with breast cancer, 40 patients were with cervical cancer and 10 patients were with ovarian cancer. Among
breast cancer patients, 24 patients (48%) belonged to a clinical sub group, 18 patients (45%) belonged to the early subgroup in cervical cancer
and 5 patients (50%) belonged to the advanced subgroup in ovarian cancer. Most of the patients with breast cancer were reported with Stage IIIa
(13 members, i.e. 26%), Stage I (13 members, i.e. 32.5%) in case of cervical cancer, Stage IIa (30%) and Stage IV (30%) in case of ovarian cancer.
Surgery, followed by CT and radiotherapy (RT) was preferred in all cancer patients studied, i.e. 78%, 67.5%, 80% of breast, cervical and ovarian
cancers respectively. 78% of patients with breast cancer, 67.5% of patients with cervical cancer and 80% of patients with ovarian cancer have shown
complete response respectively. Hair loss/alopecia is the most common AE seen in 98 patients, followed by nausea and vomiting in 72 patients, nail
pigmentation in 46 patients, pain in abdomen in 44 patients, loss of appetite in 31 patients, constipation in 29 patients, diarrhea in 27 patients, rash/
dermatitis in 19 patients and headache in 13 patients.
Conclusion: Breast cancer was found to be predominant. Most of the patients in gynecological cancer patients were found to be in the clinical stage
group and an advanced stage group indicating lack of awareness about various cancers. Combination therapy (CT, RT and surgery) is said to have a
major effect on cancer patients, which resulted in improved quality of life and symptoms. All patients receiving cytotoxic drugs suffer one or more AE.
The prevalence of AE was considerably high in spite of the using existing premedications.
Keywords: Gynecological cancer, Tumor, Nodal, Metastasis staging, Combination therapy, Adverse effects



1. Consolidated Report of Hospital Based Cancer Registries 2001-3, National Cancer Registry Program. New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research; 2007.
2. Uma Devi K. Current status of gynecological cancer care in India. J Gynecol Oncol 2009;20(2):77-80.
3. Asthana S, Chauhan S, Labani S. Breast and cervical cancer risk in India: An update. Indian J Public Health 2014;58(1):5-10.
4. dos Santos Silva I, Swerdlow AJ. Recent trends in incidence of and mortality from breast, ovarian and endometrial cancers in England and Wales and their relation to changing fertility and oral contraceptive use. Br J Cancer 1995;72(2):485-92.
5. Okobia MN, Bunker CH, Okonofua FE, Osime U. Knowledge, attitude and practice of Nigerian women towards breast cancer: A cross-sectional study. World J Surg Oncol 2006;4:11.
6. Yeole BB. Trends in cancer incidence in female breast, cervix uteri, corpus uteri, and ovary in India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2008;9(1):119‑22.
7. Dhillon PK, Yeole BB, Dikshit R, Kurkure AP, Bray F. Trends in breast, ovarian and cervical cancer incidence in Mumbai, India over a 30‑year period, 1976-2005: An age-period-cohort analysis. Br J Cancer 2011;105(5):723-30.
8. Tripathi N, Kadam YR, Dhobale RV, Gore AD. Barriers for early detection of cancer amongst Indian rural women. South Asian J Cancer 2014;3(2):122-7.
9. Alwan A. Global Status Report on Noncommunicable Diseases. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2010. p. 61-2.
10. Chabner BA, Amrein PC, Druker BJ. Antineoplastic agents. Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. 11th ed. USA: The MaGraw-Hill Companies; 2006.
11. Sweetman SC. Martindale: The Complete Drug Reference. 33rd ed. London, UK: Pharmaceutical Press; 2002.
12. Beers MH, Berko R. The Merk Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy. 17th ed. USA: Merck Publishing Group; 1999.
13. Dipiro J, Talbert RL, Yee GC, Matzke GR, Wells BG, Posey LM. Pharmacotherapy: A Pathophysiologic Approach. 6th ed. USA: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.; 2005.
14. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45(2):228‑47.
15. Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 3.0, DCTD, NCI, NIH, DHHS. March 31, 2003. Available from: http://www.ctep.cancer.gov. [Published on 2006 Aug 09].
16. Poddar S, Sultana R, Sultana R, Akbor M, Azad M, Hasnat A. Pattern of adverse drug reactions due to cancer chemotherapy in tertiary care teaching hospital in Bangladesh. Dhaka Univ J Pharm Sci 2009;8:11-6.
17. Kirthi C, Afzal A, Reddy M, Ali SA, Yerramilli A, Sharma S. A study on the adverse effects of anticancer drugs in an oncology center of a tertiary care hospital. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2014;6(2):580-3.
18. Kamath R, Mahajan KS, Ashok L, Sanal TS. A study on risk factors of breast cancer among patients attending the tertiary care hospital, in udupi district. Indian J Community Med 2013;38(2):95-9.
19. Meshram II, Hiwarkar PA, Kulkarni PN. Reproductive risk factors for breast cancer: A case control study. Online J Health Allied Sci 2009;83:5.
20. WHO/ICO Information Centre on Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) and Cervical Cancer (a). Human Papillomavirus and Related Cancers in India. Summary Report, 2009. Available from: http://www.who.int/hpvcentre/en/. [Last accessed on 2009 Nov 18].
21. Murthy NS, Shalini S, Suman G, Pruthvish S, Mathew A. Changing trends in incidence of ovarian cancer - the Indian scenario. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2009;10(6):1025-30.
22. Agarwal G, Ramakant P. Breast Cancer Care in India: The Current Scenario and the Challenges for the Future. Breast Care (Basel) 2008;3(1):21-27.
23. Saxena S, Rekhi B, Bansal A, Bagga A, Chintamani, Murthy NS: Clinico-morphological patterns of breast cancer including family history in a New Delhi hospital, India – A cross-sectional study. World J Surg Oncol 2005;3:67.
24. Guangwen Y, Lingying W, Xiaoguang L, Manni H. Analysis of prognosis and prognostic factors of cervical adenocarcinoma and adenosqumous carcinoma of the cervix. Clin Oncol Cancer Res 2009;6:133-7.
25. Chan JK, Urban R, Cheung MK, Osann K, Shin JY, Husain A, et al. Ovarian cancer in younger vs older women: A population-based analysis. Br J Cancer 2006;95(10):1314-20.
26. American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2011-2012. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, Inc.; 2013.
27. Sandhu DS, Sandhu S, Karwasra RK, Marwah S. Profile of breast cancer patients at a tertiary care hospital in north India. Indian J Cancer 2010;47(1):16-22.
28. Kuraparthy S, Reddy KM, Yadagiri LA, Yutla M, Venkata PB, Kadainti SV, et al. Epidemiology and patterns of care for invasive breast carcinoma at a community hospital in Southern India. World J Surg Oncol 2007;5:56.
29. Basu P, De P, Mandal S, Ray K, Biswas J. Study of ‘patterns of care’ of ovarian cancer patients in a specialized cancer institute in Kolkata, eastern India. Indian J Cancer 2009;46(1):28-33.
30. Scheele J, Niazi F, Drevs J, Diergarten K, Toure P. A pilot study of Auron Misheil Therapy in patients with advanced cervical cancer: tumor response and its correlation with clinical benefit response, and preliminary quality of life data. Oncol Rep 2009;22(4):877-83.
31. Coleman D. Britain in Europe: International and regional comparisons of fertility levels and trends. In: Ni Bhrolchain M, editor. New Perspectives on Fertility in Britain. Studies on Medical and Population Subjects, No. 55. London: HMSO; 1993.
32. Prasad A, Datta PP, Bhattacharya J, Pattanayak C, Chauhan AS, Panda P. Pattern of adverse drug reactions due to cancer chemotherapy in a tertiary care teaching hospital in Eastern India. J Pharmacovigil 2013;1:107.
33. Stewart DJ, Kucharczyk J, Miller AD. Nausea and Vomiting: Recent Research and Clinical Advances. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press; 1991.
34. Mallik S, Palaian S, Ojha P, Mishra P. Pattern of adverse drug reactions due to cancer chemotherapy in a tertiary care teaching hospital in Nepal. Pak J Pharm Sci 2007;20(3):214-8.
436 Views | 394 Downloads
How to Cite
Vurumadla, S. “A PROSPECTIVE STUDY ON CLINICAL EVALUATION, TREATMENT PATTERN AND ADVERSE EFFECTS OF ANTICANCER DRUGS IN VARIOUS GYNAECOLOGICAL CANCER PATIENTS”. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, Vol. 8, no. 2, Mar. 2015, pp. 125-31, https://innovareacademics.in/journals/index.php/ajpcr/article/view/4384.
Original Article(s)