1
|
Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Vandenberg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NL, Lew DL, Hayes DF, Gralow JR, Linden HM, Livingston RB, Hortobagyi GN. Abstract PD5-07: A phase III randomized trial of anastrozole and fulvestrant versus anastrozole or sequential anastrozole and fulvestrant as first-line therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer: Final survival outcomes of SWOG S0226. Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-pd5-07] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Anastrozole depletes estrogen via aromatase inhibition and fulvestrant binds and degrades estrogen receptor. In a Phase III trial we compared the concurrent use of these agents to anastrozole alone or sequential anastrozole and fulvestrant in first-line therapy of hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women, and demonstrated improved progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS)-NEJM 2012. Now we report PFS and OS five years after the initial positive findings. Methods: A total of 707 patients were randomized to either 1 mg anastrozole P.O. daily (Arm 1) or to the combination of anastrozole and fulvestrant (Arm 2). Fulvestrant was administered as a loading dose of 500 mg on day 1, 250 mg on days 14, 28 and monthly thereafter. Randomization was stratified by adjuvant tamoxifen use. The primary endpoint was PFS with OS a secondary outcome. 40% patients not in visceral crisis crossed over to fulvestrant after progression on arm 1. Analysis of survival was by 2-sided stratified log-rank tests and Cox regression using intent-to-treat. Subset analyses include treatment effect by adjuvant tamoxifen exposure, initial sites of metastases and time from diagnosis. Results: There were 646 PFS events (328 and 318 for arms 1 and 2, respectively) among 694 eligible patients (345 and 349, respectively). Overall, median PFS was 13.5 months for arm 1 and 15.0 months for the arm 2 (log-rank p=0.007; HR=0.81 (95% CI 0.69-0.94)). This benefit extended similarly in visceral and non-visceral subgroups. In subset analysis for Arms 1 and 2, respectively, in tamoxifen-naive women (60%, n=414), median PFS was 12.7 vs. 16.7 months (log-rank p=0.002; HR=0.73 (95% CI 0.60-0.89) while in women exposed to tamoxifen, median PFS was 13.9 vs. 13.6 months (log-rank p=0.57; HR=0.93 (95% CI 0.73-1.19)). An improved OS in the combination arm was seen, median OS 42 and 50 months in arms 1 and 2, based on 261 and 247 deaths, respectively (log-rank p=0.028; HR=0.82 (95% CI 0.69-0.98)). In subset analysis in tamoxifen-naive women, median OS was 40.3 vs. 52.2 months for Arms 1 and 2, respectively (log-rank p=0.007; HR=0.73 (95% CI 0.58-0.92)) while in women exposed to tamoxifen, median OS was 43.5 vs. 48.2 months (log-rank p=0.85; HR=0.97 (95% CI 0.74-1.27). Patients with initial diagnosis >10 years benefitted most from the combination (HR=0.66 (95% CI 0.49-0.89)) regardless of tamoxifen exposure. Patients in Arm 1 who crossed over had post-progression survival similar to post-progression survival of Arm 2 patients. Conclusion: The addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole was associated with improved long-term PFS and OS compared to anastrozole alone, despite the use of fulvestrant at a dose lower than the approved, and despite the substantial cross over to fulvestrant after progression on anastrozole alone. The benefit was especially notable in those without recent exposure to adjuvant endocrine therapy. Ongoing translational medicine studies will further refine the need for up front fulvestrant. ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT00075764. Funding: NIH/NCI U10CA180888, U10CA180819 and AstraZeneca.
Citation Format: Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Vandenberg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NL, Lew DL, Hayes DF, Gralow JR, Linden HM, Livingston RB, Hortobagyi GN. A phase III randomized trial of anastrozole and fulvestrant versus anastrozole or sequential anastrozole and fulvestrant as first-line therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer: Final survival outcomes of SWOG S0226 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD5-07.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- RS Mehta
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - WE Barlow
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - KS Albain
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - TA Vandenberg
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - SR Dakhil
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - NL Tirumali
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - DL Lew
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - DF Hayes
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - JR Gralow
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - HM Linden
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - RB Livingston
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - GN Hortobagyi
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Moore HCF, Unger JM, Phillips KA, Boyle F, Hitre E, Moseley A, Porter D, Francis PA, Goldstein LJ, Gomez HL, Vallejos CS, Partridge AH, Dakhil SR, Garcia AA, Gralow J, Lombard JM, Forbes JF, Martino S, Barlow WE, Fabian CJ, Minasian L, Meyskens FL, Gelber RD, Hortobagyi GN, Albain KS. Abstract P1-15-01: Final analysis of SWOG S0230/Prevention of early menopause study (POEMS). Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-p1-15-01] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The SWOG S0230/POEMS study demonstrated a 70% reduction in ovarian failure (OF) with goserelin coadministration during chemotherapy (CT) for ER-negative early breast cancer (BC; Moore H et al, NEJM 2015). Goserelin use was also associated with more pregnancies as well as favorable disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Here we report the final analysis after 5 years of follow-up.
METHODS: Premenopausal women age <50 with stage I-IIIA ER/PR-negative BC to be treated with cyclophosphamide-containing CT were randomized to receive standard CT with or without monthly goserelin 3.6 mg SQ starting at least 1 week prior to the first CT dose. The primary endpoint was OF at 2-years, defined as amenorrhea for the prior 6 months and post-menopausal FSH. Secondary endpoints included pregnancies, disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). An unplanned analysis of rate of menses recovery at 2 years (presence of menses within 6 months of the 2 year time-point or pregnancy within the first 2 years) was also conducted. OF and pregnancy endpoints were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression adjusting for stratification factors (age and CT regimen); DFS and OS were examined using multivariable Cox regression, adjusting for stratification factors and stage. Two-sided p-values are reported unless otherwise specified in accordance with protocol design.
RESULTS: Among 257 randomized participants, 218 were eligible and evaluable. One hundred thirty-six eligible and evaluable patients had OF data and 186 had menstrual data. Median age was 37.7 years. Among the 136 patients with OF data, the odds ratio (OR) for OF at 2 years was 0.30 (95% CI 0.1-0.98; one-sided p=0.023) comparing CT with goserelin to standard CT alone. Among 186 patients with menstrual data, 80% recovered menses by 2 years in the goserelin arm compared with 70% in the standard arm (OR=1.74, 95% CI: 0.83-3.66, p=0.15). Pregnancies, DFS and OS are reported for all 218 eligible and evaluable patients. With a median follow-up of 5.1 years, 22% of patients in the goserelin group had at least one pregnancy compared with 12% in the standard group (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.08-5.26, p=0.03). Cumulative incidence of pregnancy at 5 years is 23% in the goserelin arm compared with 12% in the standard group. Five-year Kaplan-Meier DFS estimates are 88% in the goserelin arm compared with 79% in the standard arm (HR=0.50, p=0.05). Five-year OS is 92% with goserelin versus 83% in the standard arm (HR=0.47, p=0.06). Including all 257 randomized patients, HR for DFS and OS are 0.67 and 0.48 (p=0.18 and p=0.05).
CONCLUSION: Ovarian suppression with goserelin during chemotherapy for hormone receptor-negative breast cancer reduces OF risk and, after 5 years of follow-up, continues to be associated with more pregnancies and improved survival compared with chemotherapy without goserelin.
SUPPORT: NIH/NCI grant awards CA189974, CA180888, CA180819, CA074362; AstraZeneca
Citation Format: Moore HCF, Unger JM, Phillips K-A, Boyle F, Hitre E, Moseley A, Porter D, Francis PA, Goldstein LJ, Gomez HL, Vallejos CS, Partridge AH, Dakhil SR, Garcia AA, Gralow J, Lombard JM, Forbes JF, Martino S, Barlow WE, Fabian CJ, Minasian L, Meyskens FL, Gelber RD, Hortobagyi GN, Albain KS. Final analysis of SWOG S0230/Prevention of early menopause study (POEMS) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-15-01.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- HCF Moore
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - JM Unger
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - K-A Phillips
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - F Boyle
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - E Hitre
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - A Moseley
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - D Porter
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - PA Francis
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - LJ Goldstein
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - HL Gomez
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - CS Vallejos
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - AH Partridge
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - SR Dakhil
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - AA Garcia
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - J Gralow
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - JM Lombard
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - JF Forbes
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - S Martino
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - WE Barlow
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - CJ Fabian
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - L Minasian
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - FL Meyskens
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - RD Gelber
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - GN Hortobagyi
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - KS Albain
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kadlubar SA, Barlow WE, Mehta RS, Daniels JR, Albain KS, Vandengerg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NR, Lew DL, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Hortobagiyi GN, Hayes DF, Rae JM. Abstract P3-07-64: Association between gene variants in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 and disease outcomes in patients enrolled in SWOG S0226 and treated with anastrozole alone or in combination with fulvestrant for metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res 2016. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs15-p3-07-64] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Anastrozole (A) blocks estrogen production by inhibiting the activity of CYP19 aromatase. Fulvestrant (F) blocks estrogen receptor (ER) signaling by competitive binding, leading to ER degradation by ubiquitination. SWOG S0226 ("Phase III Randomized Trial of Anastrozole versus Anastrozole and Fulvestrant (250mg LD) as First Line Therapy for Post Menopausal Women with Metastatic Breast Cancer," ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT00075764) demonstrated that combination of A+F is superior to A alone as first-line therapy for patients with ER positive metastatic breast cancer (Mehta et al, NEJM, 2012). Our functional preclinical studies have shown that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4, drug conjugation enzymes that inactivate A and F, result in decreased enzyme activity toward these drugs (Edavana et al, DMD, 2013; Edavana et al Pharmgenomics Pers Med 2013). We therefore hypothesized that these SNPs will be associated with disease outcomes in S0226 patients due to altered drug levels.
Methods: Germline DNA was available for 295 (43.5%) patients enrolled in S0226 overall (157 on A and 138 on A+F). SNPs in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 were determined either by direct sequencing or allele-specific PCR (TaqMan) assays.
Results: There was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) comparing patients with or without available germline DNA (p = 0.86 and 0.36, respectively). The SULT1A1 G902A allele (rs6839), which confers decreased mRNA and enzymatic activity, was associated with improved PFS (GG/GA vs. AA; HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56-0.98, p=0.033) and OS (HR 0.70, 95% 0.50-0.98, p=0.039). In exploratory subset analyses of PFS, the SULT1A1 G902A association was similar across both treatment arms (A HR=0.75; 95% CI 0.51-1.10; A+F HR=0.73; 95% CI 0.48-1.11). For OS there was some evidence of a difference by treatment (A HR=0.60; 95% CI 0.38-0.96; A+F HR=0.82; 95% CI 0.50-1.32), though no significant interaction was evident (p=0.30).
The UGT1A4 G-163A promoter variant, which leads to decreased protein expression, was not associated with PFS (AA/AG vs. GG HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68-1.14, p=0.33); however, this variant was associated with OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52-0.96, p=0.027). In subset analyses with OS, the difference was marginally stronger in the A arm (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42-0.97, p=0.035) compared to the A+F arm (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.21, p=0.25), though the interaction was not significant (p=0.40).
Conclusion: SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 gene variants resulting in decreased enzyme activity were associated with better PFS, OS or both in patients enrolled in SWOG S0226. Planned validation studies correlating these SNPs with drug levels and disease outcomes in additional patient cohorts will establish their clinical utility in identifying patients who benefit from A and F alone or in combination.
Funding: Supported by NIH/NCI CA118981; NIH/NCI/NCTN grants CA180888, CA180819, and CA180863; and in part by AstraZeneca.
Citation Format: Kadlubar SA, Barlow WE, Mehta RS, Daniels JR, Albain KS, Vandengerg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NR, Lew DL, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Hortobagiyi GN, Hayes DF, Rae JM. Association between gene variants in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 and disease outcomes in patients enrolled in SWOG S0226 and treated with anastrozole alone or in combination with fulvestrant for metastatic breast cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-64.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- SA Kadlubar
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - WE Barlow
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - RS Mehta
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - JR Daniels
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - KS Albain
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - TA Vandengerg
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - SR Dakhil
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - NR Tirumali
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - DL Lew
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - JR Gralow
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - RB Livingston
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - GN Hortobagiyi
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - DF Hayes
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - JM Rae
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Socinski MA, Okamoto I, Hon JK, Hirsh V, Dakhil SR, Page RD, Orsini J, Yamamoto N, Zhang H, Renschler MF. Safety and efficacy analysis by histology of weekly nab-paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin as first-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol 2013; 24:2390-6. [PMID: 23842283 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt235] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This analysis compared the efficacy and safety outcomes by histology of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus carboplatin (C) versus solvent-based paclitaxel (sb-P) plus C in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on preplanned stratification factors specified in the phase III trial protocol. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with untreated stage III/IV NSCLC received 100 mg/m(2) nab-P weekly and C (area under the curve, AUC = 6) every 3 weeks (q3w) or 200 mg/m(2) sb-P plus C (AUC = 6) q3w. Primary end point was objective overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS nab-P/C versus sb-P/C produced a significantly higher ORR (41% versus 24%; response rate ratio [RRR] 1.680; P < 0.001) in patients with squamous cell (SCC) NSCLC. For nab-P/C versus sb-P/C, ORRs were 26% versus 27% (RRR 0.966; P = 0.814) in patients with adenocarcinoma, 33% versus 15% (RRR 2.167; P = 0.323) in patients with large cell carcinoma (LC), and 24% versus 15% (RRR 1.593; P = 0.372) in patients with not otherwise specified histology. Median overall survival for nab-P/C versus sb-P/C in patients with SCC was 10.7 versus 9.5 months (HR 0.890; P = 0.310), and 12.4 versus 10.6 months (HR 1.208; P = 0.721) for patients with LC. nab-P/C produced significantly (P < 0.05) less grade 3/4 neuropathy and arthralgia, whereas sb-P/C produced less thrombocytopenia and anemia. CONCLUSION(S) First-line nab-P/C demonstrated a favorable risk-benefit profile in patients with NSCLC regardless of histology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Socinski
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, PA 15232, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Socinski MA, Langer CJ, Okamoto I, Hon JK, Hirsh V, Dakhil SR, Page RD, Orsini J, Zhang H, Renschler MF. Safety and efficacy of weekly nab®-paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin as first-line therapy in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol 2013; 24:314-321. [PMID: 23123509 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mds461] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This analysis evaluates safety and efficacy in elderly (≥ 70 years old) versus younger patients enrolled in a phase III advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Untreated stage IIIB/IV patients with PS 0/1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to carboplatin AUC6, day 1 every 3 weeks, and either nab-paclitaxel (Abraxane) 100 mg/m(2) weekly (nab-P/C) or solvent-based paclitaxel (Taxol) 200 mg/m(2) day 1 every 3 weeks (sb-P/C). The primary end-point was overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS Fifteen percent of 1052 enrolled patients were elderly: nab-P/C, n = 74; sb-P/C, n = 82. In both age cohorts, the ORR was higher with nab-P/C versus sb-P/C (age ≥ 70: 34% versus 24%, P = 0.196; age <70: 32% versus 25%, P = 0.013). In elderly patients, progression-free survival (PFS) trended in favor of nab-P/C (median 8.0 versus 6.8 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.687, P = 0.134), and overall survival (OS) was significantly improved (median 19.9 versus 10.4 months, HR 0.583, P = 0.009). In younger patients, PFS (median 6.0 versus 5.8 months, HR 0.903, P = 0.256) and OS (median 11.4 versus 11.3 months, HR 0.999, P = 0.988) were similar in both arms. Adverse events were similar in both age groups, with less neutropenia (P = 0.015), neuropathy (P = 0.001), and arthralgia (P = 0.029), and increased anemia (P = 0.007) with nab-P/C versus sb-P/C. CONCLUSIONS In elderly NSCLC patients, nab-P/C as first-line therapy was well tolerated and improved the ORR and PFS, with substantially longer OS versus sb-PC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Socinski
- University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Pittsburgh.
| | - C J Langer
- University of Pennsylvania, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, USA
| | - I Okamoto
- Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology,Osaka-Sayama, Japan
| | - J K Hon
- Clearview Cancer Institute, Huntsville, USA
| | - V Hirsh
- McGill University, Department of Oncology, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | - R D Page
- The Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders, Fort Worth
| | - J Orsini
- Essex Oncology of North Jerse, PA, Belleville
| | - H Zhang
- Celgene, Clinical Research and Development, Summit, USA
| | - M F Renschler
- Celgene, Clinical Research and Development, Summit, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Brufsky A, Valero V, Tiangco B, Dakhil SR, Brize A, Duenne AA, Bousfoul N, Rugo HS, Yardley DA. Bevacizumab (BEV) plus second-line taxane (TAX) or other chemotherapy (CT) for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): Subgroup analysis of RIBBON-2. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.27_suppl.290] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
290 Background: In three randomized trials in the first-line metastatic breast cancer (MBC) setting, combining BEV with CT significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint) and objective response rate (ORR) vs. CT alone. BEV also showed a significant PFS benefit in the second-line MBC setting (RIBBON-2) when combined with TAX or other CT. We analyzed data from the subgroup of patients (pts) with TNBC in RIBBON-2. Methods: Eligible pts had MBC that had progressed on first-line CT without BEV. Second-line CT (TAX, gemcitabine, capecitabine, or vinorelbine) was chosen before 2:1 randomization to CT with either BEV (10 mg/kg q2w or 15 mg/kg q3w) or placebo (PLA). All pts could receive BEV at progression. The primary endpoint was PFS. Results: RIBBON-2 included 684 pts; 159 (23%) had TNBC and of these, 67 (42%) received TAX with BEV/PLA. Baseline characteristics were broadly similar in the two treatment arms. In an exploratory analysis of pts with TNBC, BEV + CT led to significantly improved PFS and ORR vs. CT alone, and a trend toward improved overall survival (OS). The magnitude of the effect was particularly pronounced in pts receiving TAX CT. Conclusions: Pts with TNBC derive significant ORR and PFS benefit from BEV combined with second-line CT. Despite the small sample size, there was a trend (HR 0.624; p = 0.0534) toward OS benefit in pts treated with BEV, especially with TAX CT. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. Brufsky
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - V. Valero
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - B. Tiangco
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - A. Brize
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - A. A. Duenne
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - N. Bousfoul
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - H. S. Rugo
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| | - D. A. Yardley
- University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Riga Eastern University Hospital, Latvian Oncology Center, Riga, Latvia; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, PLLC,
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pruthi S, Qin R, Terstriep SA, Liu H, Loprinzi CL, Shah TRC, Tucker KF, Dakhil SR, Bury MJ, Carolla RL, Steen PD, Vuky J, Barton DL. The evaluation of flaxseed for hot flashes: Results of a randomized, controlled trial, NCCTG study N08C7. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.18_suppl.cra9015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
CRA9015 Background: Hot flashes are a common symptom during the menopause transition or following breast cancer treatment that can negatively impact the quality of life for many women. Preliminary data have suggested that flaxseed, a rich source of dietary lignans, may be a potentially effective treatment for hot flashes. Methods: A phase III randomized, placebo controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of flaxseed in reducing hot flashes. Postmenopausal women were randomly assigned to a flaxseed bar (providing 410 mg of lignans) for 6 weeks vs a placebo bar. Participants completed daily prospective, self report hot flash diaries during the baseline week and then began eating one study bar per day for 6 weeks, while continuing to record their daily hot flashes. The intra-patient difference in hot flash activity between baseline and the last treatment week was the primary endpoint. Side effects of the bars were evaluated through self report and CTC assessment. Results: Between October and December 2009, 188 women were enrolled onto this trial. Mean hot flash scores were reduced by 4.9 units in the flaxseed group and 3.5 in the placebo group (p=0.29). In both groups, a little over a third of the women received a 50% reduction in their hot flash scores. Only one side effect was significantly different between groups, that being grade 1 pruritis, which was more common (7%) in the placebo group versus 1% in the flaxseed group. Both groups reported increased abdominal distension, flatulence, diarrhea and nausea. Adherence and ability to detect treatment assignment did not differ between groups. Conclusions: The results of this trial do not support the use of 410 mg of flaxseed lignans for the reduction of hot flashes. The gastrointestinal side effects seen in both groups were likely due to the fiber content in the flaxseed and placebo bars.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S. Pruthi
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - R. Qin
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - S. A. Terstriep
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - H. Liu
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - C. L. Loprinzi
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - T. R. C. Shah
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - K. F. Tucker
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - M. J. Bury
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - R. L. Carolla
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - P. D. Steen
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - J. Vuky
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| | - D. L. Barton
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sanford Medical Center Fargo, Fargo, ND; Ann Arbor, Saginaw, MI; Ann Arbor, Warren, MI; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Cancer & Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI; Cancer Research for the Ozarks, Springfield, MO; Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND; Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WV
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Brufsky A, Valero V, Tiangco B, Dakhil SR, Brize A, Bousfoul N, Rugo HS, Yardley DA. Impact of bevacizumab (BEV) on efficacy of second-line chemotherapy (CT) for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): Analysis of RIBBON-2. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.1010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
9
|
Bilen MA, Liu D, Mathew P, Pagliaro LC, Logothetis C, Araujo JC, Aparicio A, Corn PG, Hajdenberg J, Dakhil SR, Tu S. A randomized phase II study of bone-targeted therapy in advanced androgen-dependent prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.4649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
10
|
Bushunow PW, Roscoe JA, Dudgeon DJ, Kirshner JJ, Heckler CE, Morrow GR, Dakhil SR, Collins TS, Churchill DA. Buspirone treatment of dyspnea in outpatients receiving chemotherapy: A University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program (URCC CCOP) study. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.9023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
11
|
Pruthi S, Qin R, Terstriep SA, Liu H, Loprinzi CL, Shah TRC, Tucker KF, Dakhil SR, Bury MJ, Carolla RL, Steen PD, Vuky J, Barton DL. The evaluation of flaxseed for hot flashes: Results of a randomized, controlled trial, NCCTG study N08C7. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.cra9015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
12
|
Hubbard JM, Alberts SR, Loui WS, Mahoney MR, Roberts LR, Smyrk TC, Gatalica Z, Kumar S, Dakhil SR, Flynn PJ, Lafky JM, Bury MJ. Phase I evaluation of sorafenib (SOR) and bevacizumab (BEV) as first-line therapy in hepatocellular cancer (HCC): North Central Cancer Treatment Group trial N0745. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.4116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
13
|
Guo Y, Palmer JL, Forman A, Dakhil SR, Velasco MR, Weiss M, Gilman P, Mills GM, Noga SJ, Eng C, Overman MJ, Fisch M. A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of oral alpha lipoic acid to prevent platinum-induced polyneuropathy. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.9010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
14
|
Aisner J, Manola J, Dakhil SR, Stella PJ, Schiller JH. Randomized phase II study of vandetanib (V), docetaxel (D), and carboplatin (C) followed by maintenance V or placebo (P) in patients with stage IIIb, IV, or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): PrECOG PrE0501—Update on maintenance treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.7560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
15
|
Lafky JM, Bot BM, Morlan BW, Anderson SK, Kimlinger TK, Halling TM, Kumar S, Reynolds JT, Stella PJ, Dakhil SR, Loui WS, Alberts SR, Grothey A. Circulating endothelial cells (CECs) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) treated with bevacizumab (BEV) and sorafenib. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.e14063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
16
|
Reeves B, Dakhil SR, Sloan JA, Burger KN, Le-Lindqwister NA, Soori GS, Jaslowski AJ, Kelaghan J, Lachance DH, Loprinzi CL. Paclitaxel-associated acute pain syndrome (P-APS) and its association on the development of peripheral neuropathy: NCCTG trial N08C1. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.9047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
17
|
Morrow GR, Roscoe JA, Heckler C, Dakhil SR, Wade JL, Kuebler JP, Mohile SG, Peppone LJ, Janelsins MC. A phase III study for prevention of delayed nausea: A University of Rochester CCOP study of 1,021 patients receiving chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.9012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
18
|
Hecht JR, Dakhil SR, Saleh MN, Piperdi B, Cline-Burkhardt M, Kocs DM, DeMarco LC, Chen L, Krishnan K, Cohn AL. Pooled safety results from SPIRITT: A multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase II study of FOLFIRI with panitumumab (pmab) or bevacizumab (bev) as second-line treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.4_suppl.477] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
477 Background: Pmab is a fully human monoclonal antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) approved as monotherapy in pts with chemorefractory mCRC. Many pts with mCRC who have progressed on a bev-containing regimen receive second-line bev + chemotherapy despite the lack of prospective, randomized data supporting this approach. A phase III study recently showed that pmab + second-line FOLFIRI improved progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with wild-type (WT) KRAS tumors vs chemotherapy alone. This study was amended after enrollment began to focus hypothesis testing on the WT KRAS population and is evaluating the safety and efficacy of pmab + FOLFIRI vs bev + FOLFIRI in pts who received first-line therapy with an oxaliplatin-based regimen + bev. Methods: This is a randomized, phase II, open-label study in pts with mCRC with disease progression or intolerability after ≥ 4 doses of first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy + bev. Pts are randomized 1:1 to receive either 6 mg/kg pmab Q2W + FOLFIRI or bev (given at institutional standard dose Q2W) + FOLFIRI. Tx is administered until disease progression (PD), death, or withdrawal from study. The primary endpoint is PFS in patients with WT KRAS tumors. Other endpoints include objective response rate, overall survival, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Results: At the time of data cutoff, 216 of 277 planned pts were enrolled. 175 (81%) pts discontinued study tx and 39 (18%) pts remain on tx. Any grade adverse events (AEs) were reported in 197 (92%) pts. 38 (18%) pts had AEs that led to withdrawal from tx or study. Serious AEs were reported in 66 (31%) pts and included gastrointestinal disorders (13%), infections and infestations (8%), respiratory disorders (7%), and metabolism and nutrition disorders (7%). Fatal AEs were reported in 18 (8%) pts of which 9 (4%) were related to disease progression. Conclusions: The aggregate safety profile is consistent with expected toxicities of FOLFIRI in combination with an anti-EGFR or an anti-VEGF targeted therapy in second-line mCRC. Detailed pooled safety results will be presented at the meeting. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J. R. Hecht
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - M. N. Saleh
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - B. Piperdi
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - M. Cline-Burkhardt
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - D. M. Kocs
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - L. C. DeMarco
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - L. Chen
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - K. Krishnan
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| | - A. L. Cohn
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA; Texas Oncology - Austin Central, Austin, TX; New York Oncology Hematology PC, Albany, NY; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Jatoi A, Schild SE, Foster N, Henning GT, Dornfeld KJ, Flynn PJ, Fitch TR, Dakhil SR, Rowland KM, Stella PJ, Soori GS, Adjei AA. A phase II study of cetuximab and radiation in elderly and/or poor performance status patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (N0422). Ann Oncol 2010; 21:2040-2044. [PMID: 20570832 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a disease of the elderly. Seeking a tolerable but effective regimen, we tested cetuximab + radiation in elderly and/or poor performance status patients with locally advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Older patients [≥ 65 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0, 1, or 2] or younger patients (performance status of 2) received cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) i.v. on day 1 followed by weekly cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) i.v. with concomitant radiation of 6000 cGy in 30 fractions. The primary end point was the percentage who lived 11+ months. RESULTS This 57-patient cohort had a median age (range) of 77 years (60-87), and 12 (21%) had a performance status of 2. Forty of 57 (70%) lived 11+ months, thus exceeding the anticipated survival rate of 50%. The median survival was 15.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.1-19.3 months], and the median time to cancer progression was 7.2 months (95% CI 5.8-8.6 months). No treatment-related deaths occurred, but 31 patients experienced grade 3+ adverse events, most commonly fatigue, anorexia, dyspnea, rash, and dysphagia, each of which occurred in <10% of patients. CONCLUSION This combination merits further study in this group of patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Jatoi
- Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN.
| | | | - N Foster
- Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN
| | | | - K J Dornfeld
- Duluth City Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN
| | - P J Flynn
- Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Program, St Louis Park, MN
| | | | - S R Dakhil
- Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - K M Rowland
- Carle Cancer Center City Clinical Oncology Program, Urbana, IL
| | - P J Stella
- Michigan Cancer Consortium, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - G S Soori
- Missouri Valley Cancer Consortium, Omaha, NE
| | - A A Adjei
- Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Grothey A, Lafky JM, Morlan BW, Stella PJ, Dakhil SR, Steen PD, Loui WS, Bot BM, Alberts SR, Reynolds JT. Dual VEGF inhibition with sorafenib and bevacizumab (BEV) as salvage therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Results of the phase II North Central Cancer Treatment Group study N054C. J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.3549] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
21
|
Choy H, Schwartzberg LS, Dakhil SR, Garon EB, Choksi JK, Govindan R, Peng G, Koustenis AG, Treat J, Obasaju CK. Ongoing phase II study of pemetrexed plus carboplatin or cisplatin with concurrent radiation therapy followed by pemetrexed consolidation in patients with favorable-prognosis inoperable stage IIIA/b non-small cell lung cancer: Interim update. J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.7082] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
22
|
Stuart RK, Ravandi Kashani F, Cripe LD, Maris MB, Cooper MA, Dakhil SR, Stone RM, Turturro F, Fox JA, Michelson G. Voreloxin single-agent treatment of older patients (60 years or older) with previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia: Final results from a phase II study with three schedules. J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.6525] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
23
|
Kirshner JJ, Heckler CE, Dakhil SR, Hopkins JO, Coles C, Morrow GR. Prevention of pegfilgrastim-induced bone pain (PIP): A URCC CCOP randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 510 cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.9014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
24
|
Reeves B, Dakhil SR, Sloan JA, Kamal A, Wolf SL, Burger KN, LeLindqwister N, Soori GS, Jaslowski AJ, Loprinzi CL. Natural history of paclitaxel-associated acute pain syndrome (P-APS): NCCTG trial N08C1. J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.9135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
25
|
Sukov WR, Miller DV, Dueck AC, Tenner KS, Jenkins RB, Kaufman PA, Davidson NE, Dakhil SR, Martino S, Roy V, Perez EA. Benefit of adjuvant trastuzumab in breast cancer patients with focal HER2 amplified clones: Data from N9831 Intergroup Adjuvant Trial. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.520] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
520 Background: Targeted therapy using trastuzumab (an anti-HER-2 receptor monoclonal antibody) has significantly improved survival in breast carcinoma patients (pts), but determining which pts will respond to this therapy remains a challenge. We previously reported (Miller DV, ASCO 2004 abstract #568) a subset of pts with breast cancers demonstrating focal HER-2 amplified clones (FHAC) amidst otherwise nonamplified tumor cells by fluorescence in-situ hybridization. These accounted for 21% of the HER-2 amplified but immunohistochemistry (IHC) negative cases and 30% of the HER-2 amplified but IHC equivocal cases. The clinical significance of this phenomenon was unclear at that time. We now report the disease-free survival (DFS) data on 91 FHAC pts with a comparison to the diffusely amplified (DA) cases in this trial group. Methods: Breast tumors were evaluated for HER-2 gene amplification using PathVysion™. FHAC cases demonstrated 2–40% of cells with >10 HER-2 signals and HER-2:CEP17 ratio >5.0, regardless of the overall HER-2:CEP17 ratio. Patient and disease characteristics were compared using chi-square tests. Cox regression models compared DFS between pts randomized to arms A (standard chemotherapy) and C (standard chemotherapy with concurrent trastuzumab) within 91 FHAC and 1571 DA cases. Median follow up was 4.0 years. Results: Age, race, menopausal status, surgical procedure, nodal status, histologic type and grade, and tumor size, were not significantly different between pateints with FHAC and DA. Pateints with FHAC had more frequent hormone receptor positivity compared to DA cases (66% vs 50%; p = 0.004). Hazard ratios between pts with FHAC and DA showed that both groups of pts had similar DFS (A: HR = 0.86, p = 0.65; C: HR = 0.72, p = 0.57). Hazard ratios between arms within FHAC and DA groups demonstrated similar benefit from trastuzumab in each group (FHAC: HR = 0.50, p = 0.30; DA: HR = 0.59, p < 0.0001). Results remained consistent when including hormone receptor status in the model. Conclusions: Based on a small number (n = 91) of pts with FHAC, benefit from trastuzumab appears to be similar whether the population of HER-2 amplified cells with breast carcinomas is focal or diffuse. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W. R. Sukov
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - D. V. Miller
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - A. C. Dueck
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - K. S. Tenner
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - R. B. Jenkins
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - P. A. Kaufman
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - N. E. Davidson
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - S. Martino
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - V. Roy
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| | - E. A. Perez
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacskonville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Loprinzi CL, Qin R, Stella PJ, Rowland KM, Graham DL, Erwin N, Dakhil SR, Jurgens DJ, Burger KN. Pregabalin for hot flashes in women: NCCTG trial N07C1. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.9513] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
9513 Background: Hot flashes are a major problem in many women for which better treatment options are needed. Given the known efficacy of gabapentin for decreasing hot flashes, it was decided to evaluate pregabalin, with hopes that it would work better and/or with fewer toxicities. Methods: A three-arm, double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial was developed. Women with bothersome hot flashes (at least 28/week) were randomized to receive either a placebo or target pregabalin oral doses of 75 mg bid or 150 mg bid (starting at 50 mg/d and then increasing the dose at weekly intervals to 50 mg bid, then 75 mg bid, and then, in the higher dose arm, 150 mg bid); patients were treated for 6 weeks. Hot flash numbers and scores (hot flash number times mean severity) were measured using a validated daily hot flash diary. A one-week baseline period preceded initiation of study tablets. The primary endpoint was the average intra-patient difference in hot flash score between baseline and week six, comparing the higher dose pregabalin arm and the placebo arm. With the planned sample size of 55 patients per arm, there was an 80% power and two-sided 5% Type I error rate to detect a difference of 0.54 standard deviations, or 1.08 hot flashes per day, or 2.7 units of hot flash score per day. Results: 207 patients were randomized between 6/20/2008 and 8/21/2008. The study arms were well balanced. Mean/median daily hot flash scores and frequencies for all pts at baseline were 15.7/13.4 and 8.3/7.7, respectively. The table shows the decreases in hot flashes from the baseline to the sixth treatment week. Larger numbers illustrate greater hot flash reductions. Toxicity information, quality of life information, and information regarding the effects of hot flashes on subjective symptoms will be available at the meeting time. Conclusions: Pregabalin reduces hot flashes in women. There appears to be similar effects with both studied doses. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C. L. Loprinzi
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - R. Qin
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - P. J. Stella
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - K. M. Rowland
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - D. L. Graham
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - N. Erwin
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - D. J. Jurgens
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| | - K. N. Burger
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Ann Arbor, MI; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Illinois Cancer Care, Peoria, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; CentraCare Clinic, St. Cloud, MN
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Palesh O, Mustian K, Heckler C, Purnell J, Peppone L, Weiss M, Atkins JN, Dakhil SR, Spiegel D, Morrow G. A phase III randomized prospective trial of the effect of psychotherapy on distress in 287 prostate cancer patients: A URCC CCOP Study. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.9637] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
9637 Background: Cancer patients suffer from significant psychological distress, including mood and anxiety disorders. Psychiatric disorders are common in cancer and affect 22 to 43% of cancer patients. We previously showed that Supportive Expressive Group Therapy (SET) was effective in reducing distress in women with metastatic breast cancer. The current study expands our earlier research and examines the effect of SET on mood disturbance in prostate cancer patients. Methods: A sample of 318 cancer patients diagnosed with prostate cancer was assessed for mood disturbances by 9 geographically distinct URCC CCOP affiliates. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either 12 weeks of SET or education materials as a control. Patient-reported mood disturbance was assessed using the Profile of Mood States (POMS), a psychometrically valid and reliable measure of mood states, at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Differences between treatment and control groups at follow-up were tested using a mixed-ANOVA model. The dependent variable was individual slopes on the POMS. Results: 287 patients (142 SET and 145 controls) provided complete data. No significant overall effect of intervention on mood was found (p=0.49) and the interaction between baseline mood scores and treatment arm was non-significant (p=0.075). There was a significant main effect for baseline mood (p<0.0001) suggesting that those who have the greatest mood disruption at baseline improve with time independently of treatment arm. Conclusions: This is the first large randomized clinical trial using group psychotherapy among men with prostate cancer. Results suggest that a brief SET intervention does not improve distress among men with prostate cancer. Future studies might consider recruiting patients with particular psychosymptomatology and tailoring interventions. Supported by U10 CA37420 and NCI 1R25CA102618. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- O. Palesh
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - K. Mustian
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - C. Heckler
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - J. Purnell
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - L. Peppone
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - M. Weiss
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - J. N. Atkins
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - D. Spiegel
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - G. Morrow
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Marshfield CCOP, Marshfield, WI; SCCC CCOP, Winston-Salem, NC; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Markovic SN, Suman VJ, Kottschade LA, Amatruda T, McWilliams RR, Dakhil SR, Nikcevich DA, Morton RF, Fitch TR, Jaslowski AJ. A phase II trial of carboplatin (C) and nab-paclitaxel (ABI-007-nab-P) in patients with unresectable stage IV melanoma: Final data from N057E. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.9055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
9055 Background: There is increasing evidence that paclitaxel and carboplatin are clinically active in the treatment of metastatic melanoma (MM). Nab-P is an albumin-bound paclitaxel with ability to bind SPARC (secreted protein acid rich in cysteine), that is overexpressed in MM and associated with poor prognosis. This study explores the clinical activity of the combination of nab-P and C in patients (pts) with stage IV melanoma and SPARC correlatives. Methods: A parallel phase II trial was conducted in pts with unresectable stage IV melanoma, who were either chemotherapy naïve (CN) or were previously treated (PT). A treatment regimen consisting of nab-P (100 mg/m2) and C (AUC 2) was administered on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28 day cycle. The primary aim of this study was to assess whether tumor response rate (CR + PR by RECIST) was ≤15% vs ≥35% in the CN group and ≤5% vs ≥ 20% in the PT cohort. Major eligibility criteria: ≥18 years of age, ECOG PS ≤2, adequate organ function, platinum or taxane naive, peripheral neuropathy < grade 2, and no untreated brain metastasis; no pregnant and/or nursing women. Tumor tissue was tested for SPARC and level 3 immunohistochemical staining was considered positive. Results: 76 pts (41-CN and 35 PT) enrolled from 11/2006 - 7/2007, 3 pts (2-CN, 1-PT) cancelled prior to starting treatment. The median number of cycles administered was 4 (range 1–18-CN and 1–10-PT). There were 11 (28.2%) confirmed responses (1 CR and 10 PRs) in the CN cohort (90% CI: 16.7–42.3%) and 3 (8.8%) confirmed responses (3 PRs) in the PT cohort (90% CI: 2.5–21.3%). Median PFS was 4.5 months (CN) and 4.1 months (PT). Median OS was 11.1 months (CN) and 10.9 months (PT).The most common severe toxicities in both groups (CTCAE ≥ grade 3) included neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, neuro-sensory, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting. PFS was not affected by SPARC positivity; however, based on limited data there is some evidence that OS may be longer with tumoral SPARC positivity (10.0 vs 12.8 mo; SPARC negative vs SPARC positive). Conclusions: The weekly combination of nab-P and C appears to be well tolerated with promising clinical activity as front line or salvage therapy in pts with MM. SPARC positivity may be associated with improved OS. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S. N. Markovic
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - V. J. Suman
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - L. A. Kottschade
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - T. Amatruda
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - R. R. McWilliams
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - D. A. Nikcevich
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - R. F. Morton
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - T. R. Fitch
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| | - A. J. Jaslowski
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Duluth Community Clinical Oncology Program, Duluth, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ; St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center CCOP, Green Bay, WI; Abraxis Bioscience LLC
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Ryan JL, Heckler C, Dakhil SR, Kirshner J, Flynn PJ, Hickok JT, Morrow GR. Ginger for chemotherapy-related nausea in cancer patients: A URCC CCOP randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of 644 cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.9511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
9511 Background: Despite the widespread use of antiemetics, post-chemotherapy nausea and vomiting continue to be reported by up to 70% of patients receiving chemotherapy. Ginger (Zingiber Officinale), an ancient spice, is used by practitioners worldwide to treat nausea and vomiting. We conducted a multi-site, phase II/III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial to assess the efficacy of ginger for chemotherapy-related nausea in cancer patients at the University of Rochester-affiliated Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP) member sites. Methods: Cancer patients who experienced nausea following any chemotherapy cycle and were scheduled to receive at least three additional cycles were eligible. Patients were randomized into four arms: 1) placebo, 2) 0.5g ginger, 3) 1.0g ginger, or 4) 1.5g ginger. All patients received 5-HT3 receptor antagonist antiemetics on Day 1 of all cycles and took three 250mg capsules of ginger or placebo twice daily for six days starting three days before the first day of the next two cycles. Patients reported the severity of nausea during the morning, afternoon, evening, and night on a 7-point semantic rating scale (‘1' = ‘Not at all Nauseated' and ‘7' = “Extremely Nauseated”) for Days 1–4 of each cycle. The goal was to determine if ginger was more effective than placebo in controlling chemotherapy-related nausea in participants given a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist antiemetic. Results: A total of 644 patients were accrued (90% female, mean age = 53). Breast (66%), alimentary (6.5%), and lung (6.1%) cancers were the most common cancer types. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) examined change in nausea in the four study arms on Day 1 of cycles 2 and 3. All doses of ginger significantly reduced nausea (p=0.003). The largest reduction in nausea occurred with 0.5g and 1.0g of ginger. Also, time of day had a significant effect on nausea (p<0.001) with a linear decrease over 24 hours for patients using ginger. Conclusions: Ginger supplementation at daily dose of 0.5g-1.0g significantly aids in reduction of nausea during the first day of chemotherapy. Supported by NCI PHS grants 1R25CA10618 and U10CA37420. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J. L. Ryan
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Wichita CCOP, Witchita, KS; HOACNY CCOP, Syracuse, NY; Metro-MN CCOP, St. Louis Park, MN
| | - C. Heckler
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Wichita CCOP, Witchita, KS; HOACNY CCOP, Syracuse, NY; Metro-MN CCOP, St. Louis Park, MN
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Wichita CCOP, Witchita, KS; HOACNY CCOP, Syracuse, NY; Metro-MN CCOP, St. Louis Park, MN
| | - J. Kirshner
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Wichita CCOP, Witchita, KS; HOACNY CCOP, Syracuse, NY; Metro-MN CCOP, St. Louis Park, MN
| | - P. J. Flynn
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Wichita CCOP, Witchita, KS; HOACNY CCOP, Syracuse, NY; Metro-MN CCOP, St. Louis Park, MN
| | - J. T. Hickok
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Wichita CCOP, Witchita, KS; HOACNY CCOP, Syracuse, NY; Metro-MN CCOP, St. Louis Park, MN
| | - G. R. Morrow
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Wichita CCOP, Witchita, KS; HOACNY CCOP, Syracuse, NY; Metro-MN CCOP, St. Louis Park, MN
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Gandara D, Kim ES, Herbst RS, Moon J, Redman MW, Dakhil SR, Hirsch F, Mack PC, Franklin W, Kelly K. S0536: Carboplatin, paclitaxel, cetuximab, and bevacizumab followed by cetuximab and bevacizumab maintenance in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A SWOG phase II study. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.8015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
8015 Background: Cetuximab (CX) plus platinum-based chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in advanced NSCLC (FLEX). SWOG previously showed that EGFR FISH is associated with efficacy outcomes in patients (pts) receiving CB/P/CX (S0342). Bevacizumab (B) plus chemotherapy also increases survival (E4599) in eligible pts. Given the biologic rationale for combining EGFR and VEGFR targeted agents, S0536 investigated the safety and efficacy of carboplatin (CB), paclitaxel (P) and CX plus B. Methods: Eligibility: treatment-naïve advanced stage non-squamous cell NSCLC, no requirement for EGFR positivity, PS 0–1, no brain metastases or hemoptysis. Treatment: CB AUC 6, P 200 mg/m2, B 15 mg/kg IV day 1 every 3 weeks, CX 400 mg/m2 day 1 then 250 mg/m2 weekly for up to 6 cycles; then B 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks and CX 250 mg/m2 weekly until progression. Primary endpoint: feasibility defined by the frequency and severity of ≥grade 4 hemorrhagic toxicities. Secondary endpoints: response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), OS and toxicity. Results: 110 pts enrolled from August 2006 to September 2007; 104 assessable. Pt characteristics: median age 64 years (42–78), Male/Female 52/52, PS 0/1 43/61, stage IIIB/IV 9/95, adenocarcinoma: 81, current/former smoker: 82. Overall toxicities were acceptable and comparable to S0342 and E4599. Primary endpoint was met: grade ≥4 hemorrhage: 2% (95% CI: 0–7%). There were 4 treatment-related deaths: lung hemorrhage (2), infection (1), unknown (1). Partial response (PR): 51/95 assessable (54%; 43%-64%); Stable disease (SD): 22/95 (23%). Disease control rate (PR+SD): 77%. With median follow up of 15 months (mos), PFS is 7 mos (18 pts remain progression-free) and OS is 14 mos. 1 year survival is 57% (47–67%). EGFR IHC by H score (>0 vs 0) showed a nonsignificant trend toward improved survival: 15 vs 11 mos (p=0.14). Conclusions: CB/P, CX plus B demonstrates safety, tolerability and efficacy in advanced NSCLC and is the most active regimen studied to date in SWOG. Additional S0536 biomarker studies including EGFR FISH will be presented. S0819, a Phase III trial of CB/P ± CX (plus B in eligible pts) is under development and is designed to validate EGFR FISH as a predictive biomarker. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D. Gandara
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - E. S. Kim
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - R. S. Herbst
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - J. Moon
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - M. W. Redman
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - F. Hirsch
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - P. C. Mack
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - W. Franklin
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| | - K. Kelly
- UC Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Johnson BS, Dueck AC, Dakhil SR, Stella PJ, Nikcevich DA, Franco SX, Wender DB, Schaefer PL, Colon-Otero G, Diekmann BB, Perez EA. Tolerability of lapatinib given concurrently with paclitaxel and trastuzumab as part of adjuvant therapy in patients with resected HER2+ breast cancer: initial safety data from the Mayo Clinic cancer research consortium trial RC0639. Cancer Res 2009. [DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs-2109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Abstract #2109
Background: Despite the impressive results of the recently released trastuzumab adjuvant therapy trials, 15% of patients with HER2 overexpressing or amplified breast cancer developed tumor relapse at 4 years. Lapatinib is a small molecule reversible TKI that inhibits both ErbB1 and ErbB2. The current study was developed to assess the cardiac safety and feasibility of adding lapatinib to paclitaxel and trastuzumab following as part of adjuvant therapy.
 Methods: A single-arm phase II study of doxorubicin (A, 60 mg/m2 day 1) and cyclophosphamide (C, 600 mg/m2 day 1) [q2w or q3w for 4 cycles]; followed by paclitaxel (P, 80 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15), trastuzumab (T, 4 mg/kg loading dose then 2 mg/kg days 1, 8, 15), and lapatinib (L, 1000 mg days 1-21) [12 weeks]; followed by T (6 mg/kg day 1) and L (1000 mg days 1-21) [40 weeks] was conducted. The primary endpoint was the incidence of congestive heart failure. The current unplanned safety analysis was undertaken due to the observance of a high rate of G3/4 diarrhea.
 Results: From April 2007 to June 2008, 98 pts were enrolled and initiated study treatment. Median age was 51 (range 32-72). Among 83 pts with adverse event (AE) data available, 50 (60%) pts have experienced a G3/4 non-hematologic AE. During post-AC treatment, among 53 pts with AE data available, 31 (58.5%) patients have experienced a G3/4 non-hematologic AE with 24 (45%) patients reporting G3/4 diarrhea. Median cycle of onset of G3/4 diarrhea was cycle 5 (first cycle of PTL) with 16 (64%) cases first reported during cycle 5 and 5 (20%) cases first reported during cycle 6. Among 57, 46, 38, and 32 pts receiving treatment with PTL during cycles 5-8, 65%, 57%, 61%, and 72% of patients received the full L dose, respectively. 31 patients have ended active treatment with 10 due to patient refusal and 8 due to adverse events.
 Conclusions: Preliminary data suggest that L given concurrently with P and T at a dose of 1000 mg per day induces an unacceptable rate of moderate to severe diarrhea. Careful monitoring of diarrhea as well as L dose reduction and initiation of loperamide at first occurrence of diarrhea are recommended. The dose of L when given concurrently with P and T has been amended to 750 mg per day in the current study and safety data for the 1000 mg and 750 mg per day cohorts will be presented. Implications for the ongoing ALTTO study will also be presented.
Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(2 Suppl):Abstract nr 2109.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - PJ Stella
- 4 Michigan Consortium, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | | | | - DB Wender
- 6 Siouxland Hem-Onc Assoc, Sioux City, IA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Kottschade LA, Suman VJ, Amatruda T, McWilliams RR, Dakhil SR, Nikcevich DA, Morton RF, Fitch TR, Jaslowski AJ, Markovic SN. A phase II trial of carboplatin and ABI-007 in patients with unresectable stage IV melanoma, N057E. J Clin Oncol 2008. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2008.26.15_suppl.9044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
33
|
Joppert M, Knapp M, Dakhil SR, Boccia RV, Steis R, Jones CM. A phase II trial of single-agent vinflunine as second-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (An International Oncology Network Study, #I-05–009). J Clin Oncol 2008. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2008.26.15_suppl.19033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
34
|
Barton DL, LaVasseur B, Sloan JA, Stella PJ, Flynn K, Dyar M, Dakhil SR, Atherton PJ, Diekmann B, Loprinzi CL. A phase III trial evaluating three doses of citalopram for hot flashes: NCCTG trial N05C9. J Clin Oncol 2008. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2008.26.15_suppl.9538] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
35
|
Jatoi A, Foster NR, Egner J, Burch P, Stella PJ, Rubin J, Dakhil SR, Sargent DJ, Murphy B, Alberts SR. Elderly patients with metastatic esophageal/gastric cancer: A pooled analysis of age-based outcomes from 8 consecutive North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) therapeutic trials. J Clin Oncol 2008. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2008.26.15_suppl.9507] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
36
|
Morrow GR, Jean-Pierre P, Roscoe JA, Heckler CE, Schwartzenberger PO, Giguere JK, Dakhil SR. A phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of a eugeroic agent in 642 cancer patients reporting fatigue during chemotherapy: A URCC CCOP Study. J Clin Oncol 2008. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2008.26.15_suppl.9512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
37
|
Herbst RS, Chansky K, Kelly K, Atkins JN, Davies AM, Dakhil SR, Albain KS, Kim ES, Crowley JJ, Gandara DR. A phase II randomized selection trial evaluating concurrent chemotherapy plus cetuximab or chemotherapy followed by cetuximab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Final report of SWOG 0342. J Clin Oncol 2007. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2007.25.18_suppl.7545] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
7545 Background: Randomized clinical trials have failed to show a survival benefit for small molecule epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus chemotherapy in unselected patients with metastatic NSCLC. In contrast, pilot trials of EGFR targeted antibodies plus chemotherapy have suggested enhanced anti-tumor activity. This randomized phase II selection trial was designed to select a cetuximab-chemotherapy regimen for future evaluation in a phase III setting. Methods: Untreated patients (pts) with advanced stage NSCLC were randomized to receive paclitaxel (P) 225 mg/m2 and carboplatin (Cb) AUC=6 every 3 weeks plus concurrent cetuximab (C) 400 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2, weekly for 4 cycles followed by maintenance C or sequential PCb for 4 cycles followed by C. Treatment was continued until disease progression. Eligible patients were required to have stage IIIB (pleural effusion) or IV (without brain metastases) disease, a performance status of 0–1 and adequate organ function. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The regimen with superior median survival would be considered for further evaluation provided it met a 10-month minimum. Given a true hazard ratio of 1.3, the probability of correctly choosing the superior arm would be > 90%. Results: From July 2004 to June 2005, 242 eligible pts were enrolled onto the study, Final results are described below: Conclusions: Both regimens met efficacy criterion for continued evaluation though the concurrent regimen of PCb + C, had numerically higher survival, and was chosen for further study. Some toxicities were significantly increased with concurrent therapy. A phase II trial of PCb + Cetuximab + Bevacizumab is ongoing (SWOG 0536) in anticipation of a phase III trial. Molecular correlative studies of the EGFR signaling pathway including EGFR IHC, FISH and mutation analysis are underway. No significant financial relationships to disclose. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R. S. Herbst
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - K. Chansky
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - K. Kelly
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - J. N. Atkins
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - A. M. Davies
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - K. S. Albain
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - E. S. Kim
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - J. J. Crowley
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - D. R. Gandara
- UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Southwest Oncology Group-Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Southeastern Medical Oncology Center, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Jatoi A, Rowland K, Sloan JA, Gross HM, Fishkin PA, Kahanic SP, Novotny PJ, Schaefer PL, Dakhil SR, Loprinzi CL. Does tetracycline prevent/palliate epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor-induced rash? A phase III trial from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (N03CB). J Clin Oncol 2007. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2007.25.18_suppl.lba9006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
LBA9006 Purpose: Many patients who receive EGFR inhibitors develop an acneiform rash, and anecdotal reports suggest tetracycline is effective in treating it. To our knowledge, however, no rigorous trials have ever been published to substantiate this approach. This double- blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to assess the role of tetracycline in preventing EGFR inhibitor-induced rash and/or reducing its severity. Methods: 61 patients were randomly assigned to tetracycline 500 mg orally twice a day×4 weeks versus an identical, similarly prescribed placebo. Eligibility criteria required all patients to have begun an EGFR inhibitor </= 7 days prior with no rash at study entry. Patients were to be followed for 8 weeks. Physician assessments of rash incidence, severity, and adverse events, occurred at 4 and 8 weeks. Patients completed a weekly rash diary, quality of life questionnaire (SKINDEX-16), and EGFR inhibitor compliance questionnaire. Thirty patients per group provides 90% power to detect a difference in rash incidence (the primary endpoint) of 40% between groups and of rejecting the null hypothesis of equal proportions with a type I error of 5% (2-sided). Results: Treatment arms were balanced on baseline characteristics, drop out rates, and rates of discontinuation of the EGFR inhibitor. Rash incidence was comparable across arms. Physicians reported that 16 tetracycline-treated patients (70%) and 22 placebo-exposed patients (76%) developed a rash (p=0.61). However, tetracycline appears to have lessened rash severity. By week 4, physician-reported grade 2 rash occurred in 17% of tetracycline-treated patients (n=4) and 55% of placebo- exposed patients (n=16); (p=0.04). Tetracycline-treated patients reported better scores on certain quality of life parameters (SKINDEX-16), such as skin burning or stinging, skin irritation, and being bothered by a persistence/recurrence of a skin condition. Adverse events were comparable across arms. Conclusion: Tetracycline did not prevent EGFR inhibitor-induced rashes. However, diminished rash severity and improved quality of life suggest this antibiotic merits further study. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. Jatoi
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - K. Rowland
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - J. A. Sloan
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - H. M. Gross
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - P. A. Fishkin
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - S. P. Kahanic
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - P. J. Novotny
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - P. L. Schaefer
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| | - C. L. Loprinzi
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc., Dayton, OH; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Toledo Community Hospital Program (TCHOP), Toledo, OH; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Ansell SM, Geyer SM, Kurtin PJ, Inwards DJ, Kaufmann SH, Flynn PJ, Morton RF, Luyun RF, Dakhil SR, Gross H, Witzig TE. Anti-tumor activity of mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus for relapsed mantle cell lymphoma: A phase II trial in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.7532] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
7532 Background: Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) is characterized by t(11;14) resulting in over expression of cyclin D1, a member of the phosphatidylinosital 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway. Temsirolimus is a novel inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) kinase. Previous studies with weekly temsirolimus at a dose of 250mg demonstrated a 38% overall response rate in 35 patients (JCO 23 (23); 5347–56, 2005). Thrombocytopenia was frequently observed and was dose limiting. The current study tested whether low-doses (25mg) of temsirolimus could produce a similar overall response rate (ORR) with less toxicity. Methods: Eligible patients had biopsy proven cyclin D1 positive MCL and had relapsed or were refractory to therapy. Patients received temsirolimus 25mg IV weekly as a single agent. Patients were restaged after 1 cycle (4 doses), after 3 cycles, and every 3 cycles thereafter. Patients with a tumor response after 6 cycles were eligible to continue drug for a total of 12 or 2 cycles after complete remission (CR) and then were observed without maintenance. The goal was to achieve an ORR of at least 20%. Results: Twenty-nine patients were enrolled between March and August 2005. Twenty-two patients have completed therapy. One patient with a major protocol violation on cycle-1 and one ineligible patient were excluded, leaving 27 evaluable patients. The ORR was 41% (11/27), with 1 CR and 10 PRs. Early evaluation of TTP showed a median of 5.5 months (95% CI: 3.3–7.7) and the duration of response for the 11 responders was 6.2 months (95% CI: 3.6 to not yet reached). These results compare favorably with the 6.5 months and 6.9 months, respectively, found in previous trials that used 250 mg. The median dose delivered per month was 80 mg (range, 10–100 mg). Sixteen (59%) of patients required a dose reduction. The median time on treatment was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.3–7.7). The incidence of grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was 12% and 0%, respectively. One patient experienced grade 5 infection without neutropenia, which was considered unrelated to CCI-779. Conclusions: Single agent CCI-779 at a dose of 25mg has anti-tumor activity in relapsed MCL similar to the 250 mg dose. This study indicates that combinations of temsirolimus with other agents should be feasible. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S. M. Ansell
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - S. M. Geyer
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - P. J. Kurtin
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - D. J. Inwards
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - S. H. Kaufmann
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - P. J. Flynn
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - R. F. Morton
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - R. F. Luyun
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - H. Gross
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - T. E. Witzig
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St. Louis Park, MN; Iowa Oncology Research Association CCOP, Des Moines, IA; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology and Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Witzig TE, Geyer SM, Kurtin PJ, Colgan JP, Inwards DJ, Micallef IN, Michalak JC, Salim M, Nikcevich DA, Dakhil SR, Fitch TR. Salvage chemotherapy with rituximab DHAP (RDHAP) for relapsed non-hodgkin lymphoma (NHL): A phase II trial in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.7574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
7574 Background: Patients (pts) with relapsed aggressive NHL are usually treated with intensive platinum-based chemotherapy regimens prior to stem cell transplant (SCT). This study was designed to learn the toxicity and efficacy of adding 4 doses of rituximab to the standard DHAP salvage chemotherapy regimen. Methods: Eligible pts had biopsy-proven relapsed CD20+ NHL and were eligible for platinum-based chemotherapy. Pts were treated with rituximab 375 mg/m2 d1,8,15, and 22 as well as cis-platinum 100 mg/m2 d3, cytosine arabinoside 2 g/m2 IV q 12 hours x two doses d4, dexamethasone 40 mg PO/IV d3–6, and G-CSF d5–14. Pts were restaged after 1 and 2 cycles; responding pts could proceed to SCT or further cycles of DHAP at MD discretion. There was no provision for rituximab maintenance. The goal was to achieve an overall response rate (ORR) of ≥ 75%. Results: Fifty-eight pts were enrolled between 10/29/00 and 6/20/03. The median age was 63 years (range, 43–83). One pt was ineligible because the tumor was CD20-. All 57 eligible pts completed one cycle; 48 pts completed 2 cycles. The ORR was 70% (40/57) with 16 (28%) CR/CRu and 24 (42%) PR. For all 57 pts, the median TTP was 13.1 months (mos) (95% CI: 7.3–18.2) and the median OS 30.5 mos (95% CI: 17.8–52.5). Seventeen pts (30%) proceeded to SCT. The median duration of response (DR), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) for the SCT pts were 41.6, 42.3, and 43.6 mos, respectively. The median DR, TTP, and OS for the 25 pts who responded to RDHAP but did not proceed to SCT were 12.4, 13.1, and 38.8 mos, respectively. The incidence of grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was 53% and 39%, respectively. The incidence of grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was 11% and 68%, respectively. Six pts (11%) had nephrotoxicity–five grade 3 and two grade 4 (one pt had both) and one pt required dialysis. Conclusions: The addition of rituximab to standard DHAP is safe with similar toxicity profile to DHAP alone. Despite a high ORR, the CR rate and the % pts proceeding to SCT in this cooperative group setting remain low. New agents are needed that can be added to these regimens to increase the effectiveness and reduce toxicity to allow more pts to proceed to SCT. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T. E. Witzig
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - S. M. Geyer
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - P. J. Kurtin
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - J. P. Colgan
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - D. J. Inwards
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - I. N. Micallef
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - J. C. Michalak
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - M. Salim
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - D. A. Nikcevich
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - T. R. Fitch
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Allan Blair Cancer Center, Regina, SK, Canada; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Kelly K, Herbst RS, Crowley JJ, McCoy J, Atkins JN, Lara PN, Dakhil SR, Albain KS, Kim ES, Gandara DR. Concurrent chemotherapy plus cetuximab or chemotherapy followed by cetuximab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A randomized phase II selectional trial SWOG 0342. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.7015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
7015 Background: Randomized clinical trials have failed to show a survival benefit for small molecule EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. In contrast, pilot trials of EGFR targeted antibodies plus chemotherapy have suggested enhanced anti-tumor activity. This large randomized phase II trial was designed to select a cetuximab -chemotherapy regimen for future evaluation in a phase III setting. Methods: Untreated patients (pts) with stage IIIB (by pleural effusion) or IV (without brain metastases) NSCLC, with a performance status of 0–1 and adequate organ function were randomized to received paclitaxel (P) 225 mg/m2 and carboplatin (Cb) AUC=6 every 3 weeks plus cetuximab (C) 400 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2, weekly for 4 cycles followed by maintenance C or the same doses of PCb for 4 cycles followed by C. C was continued until disease progression or 1 year of therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival; the statistical design required a median survival of ≥ 10 months for a regimen to be selected for subsequent phase III trial evaluation. The probability of correctly choosing the superior arm is 91% when the true hazard ratio is 1.3. Results: From July 2004 to June 2005, 225 eligible pts were enrolled into the study. Preliminary results are described below: Conclusions: At the time of this analysis, efficacy and toxicity were similar in the two treatment arms; both regimens were well tolerated. Assuming these results are sustained, the concurrent regimen of PCb + cetuximab has met the criteria for continued evaluation. A phase II trial of PCb + cetuximab + bevacizumab (B) is in development in anticipation of a phase III trial testing PCbB ± cetuximab. Molecular correlative studies of the EGFR signaling pathway are ongoing. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K. Kelly
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - R. S. Herbst
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - J. J. Crowley
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - J. McCoy
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - J. N. Atkins
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - P. N. Lara
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - K. S. Albain
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - E. S. Kim
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - D. R. Gandara
- University of Colorado, Aurora, CO; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Goldsboro, NC; University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA; Wichita CCOP, Emporia, KS; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Jatoi A, Dakhil SR, Kugler JW, Rowland KM, Keit J, Verdirame JD, Novotny PJ, Sloan JA, Nguyen PL, Loprinzi CL. A placebo-controlled trial of etanercept, a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor, in patients with the cancer anorexia/weight loss syndrome. North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) trial N00C1. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.8534] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
8534 Purpose: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) is a putative mediator of the cancer anorexia/weight loss syndrome. This study was designed to determine if etanercept (a dimeric fusion protein consisting of the extracellular ligand-binding portion of the human 75 kilodalton TNF receptor linked to the Fc portion of human IgG1) could palliate this syndrome. Methods: 63 evaluable patients were randomly assigned to etanercept 25 mg SQ twice/week versus a comparably-administered placebo, both of which were to be given for at least 12 weeks. All patients had an incurable malignancy, acknowledged loss of weight and/or appetite as a concern, and reported weight loss of > 5 pounds over 2 months and/or a daily intake of < 20 calories/kg body weight. The above sample size provided 81% power to detect a 24% difference in the percentage of patients who gained >/= 10% of baseline weight. Results: At baseline, groups were comparable on age, gender, tumor type, and degree of weight loss. Over time, weight gain was minimal in both groups; no patient gained >/= 10% baseline weight. Appetite questionnaires (the NCCTG Anorexia/Cachexia Questionnaire and FACT-AN) revealed negligible improvements in both groups. Median survival was comparable: 175 days versus 148 in etanercept-treated and placebo-exposed patients, respectively (p=0.82). Finally, preliminary data on adverse events showed that etanercept-treated patients had higher rates of neurotoxicity (29% versus 0%) but lower rates of anemia (0% versus 19%) and thrombocytopenia (0% versus 14%). Infection rates were negligible in both groups. Clinical correlative data on TNF genotyping will be available at the time of the meeting. Conclusion: This TNF inhibitor does not appear to palliate the cancer anorexia/weight loss syndrome. The study was supported by CA37404, the American Institute for Cancer Research, and Amgen. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. Jatoi
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - J. W. Kugler
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - K. M. Rowland
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - J. Keit
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - J. D. Verdirame
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - P. J. Novotny
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - J. A. Sloan
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - P. L. Nguyen
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - C. L. Loprinzi
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Oncology Hematology Associates, Peoria, IL; Carle Cancer Center, Urbana, IL; Alegent Health Immanuel Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Hofman M, Morrow GR, Ranson SL, Jean-Pierre P, Dakhil SR, Moore T, Atkins J. Chemotherapy-naïve cancer patients’ expectations of developing treatment-related side effects: A URCC CCOP study of 670 patients from community practices. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.8509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
8509 Background: Adequate management of cancer related side effects is important for patients yet challenging for clinical staff. Cancer treatment side effects have been characterized reasonably well in the literature; however, less is known about the relationships among response expectancies, personal characteristics, and side effects development of chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing doxorubicin treatments. Methods: The present sample included 701 cancer patients from 14 CCOP institutions affiliated with the URCC CCOP research base. Of the total sample, 670 patients provided evaluable data to an item that assessed expectations that they will develop side effects such as nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and hair loss. Patients indicated their expectations on a 5-point scale (from 1 = “I am certain I will NOT have this” to 5 = “I am certain I WILL have this”). Results: The median number of symptoms expected (any value other than 1) was 4. Hair loss was most expected (98%) and vomiting the least (87%). Older patients (> 53-years, N = 316, ) were less confident they would get nausea (Mold = 2.96, SE = 0.064; Myoung = 3.23, SE = 0.057, p < 0.01) and hair loss (Mold = 4.22, SD = 0.063; Myoung = 4.39, SE = 0.051, p < 0.05). Females (n = 633) were more confident they would get hair loss than males (Mfemale = 4.34, SE = 0.041; Mmale = 3.89, SE = 0.172, p < 0.05). Patients who had some college (n = 397) thought it was more likely they would get hair loss than patients with less education (Mcollege = 4.38, SE = 0.048; Mnocollege = 4.21, SE = 0.069, p < 0.05). Conclusions: Chemotherapy-naïve patients scheduled to take doxorubicin clearly exhibit expectations about treatment side effects, which are influenced by age, gender and education. The findings show that knowledge of patients’ response expectancies and personal characteristics should be considered and integrated into interventions to control treatment side effects. Supported, in part, by a supplement from the Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, NCI, to Public Health Service grant U10 CA37420 and by grant RSG-01-071-PBP from the ACS [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M. Hofman
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; CCOP, Wichita, KS; CCOP, Columbus, OH; SCCC, Winston-Salem, NC
| | - G. R. Morrow
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; CCOP, Wichita, KS; CCOP, Columbus, OH; SCCC, Winston-Salem, NC
| | - S. L. Ranson
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; CCOP, Wichita, KS; CCOP, Columbus, OH; SCCC, Winston-Salem, NC
| | - P. Jean-Pierre
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; CCOP, Wichita, KS; CCOP, Columbus, OH; SCCC, Winston-Salem, NC
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; CCOP, Wichita, KS; CCOP, Columbus, OH; SCCC, Winston-Salem, NC
| | - T. Moore
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; CCOP, Wichita, KS; CCOP, Columbus, OH; SCCC, Winston-Salem, NC
| | - J. Atkins
- University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; CCOP, Wichita, KS; CCOP, Columbus, OH; SCCC, Winston-Salem, NC
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Inwards DJ, Hillman DW, Fishkin PA, White WL, Morton RF, Dakhil SR, Nikcevich DA, Wender DB, Fitch TR, Kurtin PJ. Phase II study of rituximab and cladribine (2-CDA) in newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) (N0189). J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.17505] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
17505 Background: A previous trial of 2-CDA as a single agent for therapy of mantle cell lymphoma demonstrated this agent to be efficacious with an overall response rate of 81% (31% complete responses) (Blood 1999 Nov 15; 94:660a). A phase II study of the addition of rituximab to 2-CDA was conducted by the North Central Cancer Treatment Group based on improved outcomes achieved by the addition of rituximab to other regimens active in MCL. Methods: This one-stage phase II study was designed to determine the complete response (CR) or complete response/unconfirmed (CRu) rate. Central pathology confirmation of cyclin D1 positive mantle cell lymphoma was required. No previous therapy for lymphoma was allowed, with the exception of splenectomy. The shedule was rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV day 1; 2-CDA 5 mg/m2/d IV days 1–5 of a 4-week cycle. After 2 of the first 6 patients developed grade 4 neutropenia, subsequent patients received either pegfilgrastim or filgrastim support. Patients received 2–6 cycles of therapy, depending on response. Patients were required to achieve at least a PR after 2 cycles of therapy to continue on protocol therapy. Results: Patient characteristics of all 29 eligible pts: median age: 70 (range: 41–86); 21 male, 8 female; PS 0 (55.2%), PS 1 (41.4%), PS 2 (3.5%); stage II (6.9%), stage III (3.5%), stage IV (89.7%); prior splenectomy (20.7%). The only grade 4 adverse event occurring more than once was neutropenia (20.7%). One patient died of cerebral ischemia in the setting of pneumonia without neutropenia. Response has been determined in 26 pts with 50.0% (95% CI: 30.0–70.0%) achieving a CR, none of whom have relapsed to date. Three patients progressed early at 17, 45, and 46 days, two of whom have died, and a fourth relapsed day 222. 10 pts (34.0%) went on to receive further therapy off study, 5 in less than a PR after 2 cycles, 2 in PR after study therapy, and 1 who went off study for a rash. At last contact, 26 (89.7%) were alive (median follow-up 10.7 months; range: 1–28). Conclusions: Rituximab and cladribine were well tolerated for the treatment of MCL in a group including elderly patients. The response rate may have been underestimated due to the study design, which required at least a PR after 2 cycles to continue therapy. Despite this, 50% achieved a complete remission. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D. J. Inwards
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - D. W. Hillman
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - P. A. Fishkin
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - W. L. White
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - R. F. Morton
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - D. A. Nikcevich
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - D. B. Wender
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - T. R. Fitch
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - P. J. Kurtin
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN; Illinois Oncology Research Association, Peoria, IL; Medical Oncology and Hematology Associates, Des Moines, IA; Witchita CCOP, Witchita, KS; Duluth Clinic, Duluth, MN; Siouxland Regional Cancer Center, Sioux City, IA; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Fidias P, Dakhil SR, Lyss AP, Loesch DM, Waterhouse D, Cunneen J, Ye Z, Tai F, Obasaju CK, Schiller JH. Updated report of a phase III study of induction therapy with gemcitabine + carboplatin (GC) followed by either delayed vs. immediate second-line therapy with docetaxel (D) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.7032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
7032 Background: GC is an active regimen in patients with advanced NSCLC. For non-progressors after induction treatment, optimal timing of sequential therapy is unclear. Is it best to sequence immediately to an active non-cross resistant agent or delay the introduction of this agent until time of disease progression (PD)? This trial was designed to answer this question. Methods: Pts with Stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were enrolled. G 1000mg/m2 was administered on day 1,8 followed by C at AUC 5.0 on day 1. After 4 cycles, non-progressers were then randomized to immediate D (75mg/m2 administered on day 1 every 3 wks) or delayed D (pts were observed until first evidence of PD). Conclusions: This study confirms that it is possible to deliver docetaxel immediately following four cycles of GC without significantly increasing toxicity. The response rate of 42.1% and clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD) of 88.2% observed in the immediate D arm compares favorably with the rates of 6.1% and 60.6% of the delayed D arm. Additional toxicity and response information will be available at the time of the meeting. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P. Fidias
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - A. P. Lyss
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - D. M. Loesch
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - D. Waterhouse
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - J. Cunneen
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - Z. Ye
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - F. Tai
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - C. K. Obasaju
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| | - J. H. Schiller
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Penrose Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Oncology Hematology Care, Inc., Cincinnati, OH; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN; University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, WI
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Giordano KF, Jatoi A, Stella PJ, Foster N, Tschetter LK, Alberts SR, Dakhil SR, Mailliard JA, Flynn PJ, Nikcevich DA. Docetaxel and capecitabine in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction: a phase II study from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. Ann Oncol 2006; 17:652-6. [PMID: 16497828 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdl005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previous studies suggest that the combination of docetaxel and capecitabine are worthy of further testing in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction. We therefore undertook this phase II study to test this combination in a multi-institutional, first-line clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-four eligible patients with histologic or cytologic confirmation of the above malignancy were recruited. The cohort had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance scores of 0, 1 and 2 in 59%, 39% and 2% of patients, respectively. Median age was 57 years (range 32-77 years). Adequate organ function was a requirement for study entry. All patients were prescribed docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and capecitabine 825 mg/m2 orally twice a day on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle. RESULTS The tumor response rate was 39% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23% to 55%]. There were two complete responses and the rest were partial. Median survival was 9.4 months (95% CI 6.3-10.7 months) and median time-to-tumor progression was 4.2 months (95% CI 3.6-5.6 months). There was one treatment-related death from a myocardial infarction and dysrhythmia. Commonly occurring grade 3 adverse events included neutropenia (11 patients), infection (five patients), constipation (three patients), thrombosis (three patients), dyspnea (three patients) and hand-foot syndrome (three patients). In addition, 24/45 patients developed grade 4 neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS The regimen docetaxel and capecitabine shows activity in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction. This regimen merits further study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K F Giordano
- Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Hussein MA, Gundacker H, Head DR, Elias L, Foon KA, Boldt DH, Dobin SM, Dakhil SR, Budd GT, Appelbaum FR. Cyclophosphamide followed by fludarabine for untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a phase II SWOG TRIAL 9706. Leukemia 2005; 19:1880-6. [PMID: 16193091 DOI: 10.1038/sj.leu.2403940] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) accounts for 95% of chronic leukemia cases and 25% of all leukemia. Despite the prevalence of CLL, progress in its treatment has been only modest over the past three decades. Based upon the ability of fludarabine to produce high-grade remissions especially among patients with low initial tumor mass, and the ability of alkylators to reduce tumor mass, we hypothesized that sequential administration of a limited number of cycles of intermediate-dose cyclophosphamide followed by fludarabine could result in a larger percentage of patients with complete remissions (CRs). In all, 27 of the 49 eligible patients achieved overall responses of CR, unconfirmed complete remission (UCR), or PR, for a total response rate of 55% (95% confidence interval (CI) 40-69%). Considering the confounding medical issues of this patient population with advanced aggressive disease, the regimen was generally well tolerated. This study demonstrates that high-dose cyclophosphamide followed by fludarabine was relatively well tolerated in this group of advanced CLL patients. The study's criterion for testing whether the regimen is sufficiently effective to warrant further investigation was met: 14 (32%) of the first 44 eligible patients achieved CR or UCR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Hussein
- Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Myeloma Program, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Hickok JT, Morrow GR, Roscoe JA, Wade JL, Dakhil SR, Kuebler JP, Bushunow P. Serotonin receptor antagonists are no better than prochlorperazine for control of delayed nausea (DN) caused by doxorubicin: A URCC CCOP study of 701 pPatients. J Clin Oncol 2005. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2005.23.16_suppl.8006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- J. T. Hickok
- Univ of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Central Illinois CCOP, Decatur, IL; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Columbus CCOP, Columbus, OH; Rochester Gen Hosp, Rochester, NY
| | - G. R. Morrow
- Univ of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Central Illinois CCOP, Decatur, IL; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Columbus CCOP, Columbus, OH; Rochester Gen Hosp, Rochester, NY
| | - J. A. Roscoe
- Univ of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Central Illinois CCOP, Decatur, IL; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Columbus CCOP, Columbus, OH; Rochester Gen Hosp, Rochester, NY
| | - J. L. Wade
- Univ of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Central Illinois CCOP, Decatur, IL; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Columbus CCOP, Columbus, OH; Rochester Gen Hosp, Rochester, NY
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Univ of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Central Illinois CCOP, Decatur, IL; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Columbus CCOP, Columbus, OH; Rochester Gen Hosp, Rochester, NY
| | - J. P. Kuebler
- Univ of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Central Illinois CCOP, Decatur, IL; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Columbus CCOP, Columbus, OH; Rochester Gen Hosp, Rochester, NY
| | - P. Bushunow
- Univ of Rochester, Rochester, NY; Central Illinois CCOP, Decatur, IL; Wichita CCOP, Wichita, KS; Columbus CCOP, Columbus, OH; Rochester Gen Hosp, Rochester, NY
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Witzig TE, Ansell SM, Geyer SM, Kurtin PJ, Rowland KM, Flynn PJ, Morton RF, Dakhil SR, Gross HM, Maurer MJ, Kaufmann SH. Anti-tumor activity of low-dose single agent CCI-779 for relapsed mantle celllLymphoma: A phase II trial in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. J Clin Oncol 2005. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2005.23.16_suppl.6504] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- T. E. Witzig
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - S. M. Ansell
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - S. M. Geyer
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - P. J. Kurtin
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - K. M. Rowland
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - P. J. Flynn
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - R. F. Morton
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - H. M. Gross
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - M. J. Maurer
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| | - S. H. Kaufmann
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Carle Cancer Ctr, Urbana, IL; Metro-Minnesota Community Clin Oncology, St. Louis Park, MN; Medcl Oncology & Hematology Assoc, Des Moines, IA; Wichita Community Clin Oncology Program, Wichita, KS; Hematology & Oncology of Dayton, Inc, Dayton, OH
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Schiller JH, Fidias P, Dakhil SR, Lyss AP, Figueroa JA, Choksi JK, Loesch DM, Bloss LP, Ye Z, Obasaju CK. A phase III study of induction therapy with gemcitabine + carboplatin (GC) followed by either delayed vs. immediate second-line therapy with docetaxel (D) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol 2005. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2005.23.16_suppl.7142] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- J. H. Schiller
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - P. Fidias
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - S. R. Dakhil
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - A. P. Lyss
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - J. A. Figueroa
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - J. K. Choksi
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - D. M. Loesch
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - L. P. Bloss
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Z. Ye
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| | - C. K. Obasaju
- Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MA Gen Hosp, Boston, MA; Cancer Ctr of Kansas, PA, Wichita, KS; Missouri Baptist Cancer Ctr, St. Louis, MO; Joe Arrington’s Cancer Ctr, Lubbock, TX; Alamance Cancer Ctr, Burlington, NC; Central Indiana Cancer Centers, Indianapolis, IN; Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN
| |
Collapse
|