Results of the Dutch scalp cooling registry in 7424 patients: analysis of determinants for scalp cooling efficacy

Toni S. Brook, Tanja Seetsen, Marcus W Dercksen, Annemarie van Riel, Veerle A. Derleyn, Johan van den Bosch, Johannes W R Nortier, Andrew Collett, Nik Georgopoulos, Jarosław Bryk, Wim P M Breed

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Chemotherapy-induced alopecia is a common consequence of cancer treatment with a high psychological impact on patients and
can be prevented by scalp cooling (SC). With this multi-center patient series, we examined the results for multiple currently used chemotherapy
regimens to offer an audit into the real-world determinants of SC efficacy.

Materials and methods: The Dutch Scalp Cooling Registry collected data on 7424 scalp-cooled patients in 68 Dutch hospitals. Nurses and patients completed questionnaires on patient characteristics, chemotherapy, and SC protocol. Patient-reported primary outcomes at the start of the final SC session included head cover (HC) (eg, wig/scarf) use (yes/no) as a surrogate for patient satisfaction with SC and WHO score for alopecia (0=no hair loss up to 3=total alopecia) as a measure of scalp cooling success. Exhaustive logistic regression analysis stratified by chemotherapy regimen was implemented to examine characteristics and interactions associated with the SC result.

Results: Overall, over half of patients (n=4191, 56%) did not wear a HC and 53% (n=3784/7183) reported minimal hair loss (WHO score 0/1) at the start of their final treatment. Outcomes were drug and dose dependent. Besides the chemotherapy regimen, this study did not identify any patient characteristic or lifestyle factor as a generic determinant influencing SC success. For non-gender specific cancers, gender played no statistically significant role in HC use nor WHO score.

Conclusions: Scalp cooling is effective for the majority of patients. The robust model for evaluating the drug and dose-specific determinants of SC efficacy revealed no indications for changes in daily practice, suggesting factors currently being overlooked. As no correlation was identified between the determinants explaining HC use and WHO score outcomes, new methods for evaluation are warranted.
Original languageEnglish
Article numberoyae116
Number of pages10
JournalOncologist
Early online date13 Jun 2024
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 13 Jun 2024

Cite this