Alan K. Hatfield

Megestrol acetate for the prevention of hot flashes.

Background Vasomotor hot flashes are a common symptom in women during menopause and in men who have undergone androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Although treatment with estrogens in women and androgens in men can attenuate these symptoms, these hormones may be contraindicated in women with breast cancer and in men with prostate cancer. Pilot trials have suggested that the progestational agent megestrol acetate can ameliorate hot flashes in both groups of patients. Methods The patients included 97 women with a history of breast cancer and 66 men with prostate cancer who had undergone androgen-deprivation therapy. All patients had experienced bothersome hot flashes (median number per day at base line, 6.1 for the women and 8.4 for the men). After a one-week pretreatment observation period, the patients received megestrol acetate (20 mg twice daily) for four weeks, followed by placebo for four weeks, or vice versa in a double-blind manner as determined by pretreatment randomization. The patien...

Phase III evaluation of four doses of megestrol acetate as therapy for patients with cancer anorexia and/or cachexia.

PURPOSE Several placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that megestrol acetate can result in appetite stimulation and nonfluid weight gain in patients with cancer anorexia/cachexia. The present trial was designed to compare megestrol acetate doses ranging from 160 to 1,280 mg/d. METHODS This trial randomized 342 assessable patients with cancer anorexia/cachexia to receive oral megestrol acetate at doses of 160, 480, 800, or 1,280 mg/d. Patients were evaluated monthly by history, examination, patient-completed questionnaires, and serum albumin levels. RESULTS The data demonstrate that there is a positive dose-response effect for megestrol acetate on appetite stimulation (P < or = .02). In concert, there was a trend for more nonfluid weight gain with higher drug doses. Megestrol acetate was well tolerated in this group of patients with advanced malignant disease. CONCLUSION The positive dose-response effect that we observed for megestrol acetate on appetite stimulation supports both our prestudy hypothesis and other available literature. Nonetheless, based primarily on the cost and inconvenience associated with the use of higher doses of this drug, it is reasonable to use 160 mg/d for the initial treatment of cancer anorexia/cachexia in routine clinical practice.

Phase III placebo-controlled trial of capsaicin cream in the management of surgical neuropathic pain in cancer patients.

PURPOSE A minority of cancer survivors develops long-term postsurgical neuropathic pain. Based on evidence that capsaicin, the pungent ingredient in hot chili peppers, might be useful for treating neuropathic pain, we developed the present clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Ninety-nine assessable patients with postsurgical neuropathic pain were entered onto this study. After stratification, patients were to receive 8 weeks of a 0.075% capsaicin cream followed by 8 weeks of an identical-appearing placebo cream, or vice versa. A capsaicin/placebo cream was to be applied to the painful site four times daily. Treatment evaluation was performed by patient-completed weekly questionnaires. RESULTS During the first 8-week study period, the capsaicin-cream arm was associated with substantially more skin burning, skin redness, and coughing (P < .0001 for each). Nonetheless, treatment was stopped for patient refusal or toxicity just as often while patients were receiving the placebo as compared with the capsaicin. The capsaicin cream arm had substantially more pain relief (P = .01) after the first 8 weeks, with an average pain reduction of 53% versus 17%. On completion of the 16-week study period, patients were asked which treatment period was most beneficial. Of the responding patients, 60% chose the capsaicin arm, 18% chose the placebo arm, and 22% chose neither (P = .001). CONCLUSION A topical capsaicin cream decreases postsurgical neuropathic pain and, despite some toxicities, is preferred by patients over a placebo by a three-to-one margin among those expressing a preference.

Development of anticipatory nausea: A prospective analysis.

The development of anticipatory nausea in cancer chemotherapy typically has been viewed in terms of a respondent learning model. Firm support for this etiological model has been precluded by use of retrospective research designs, however. The present study employed a prospective design to identify patientand treatment-related variables characteristic of patients who subsequently develop anticipatory nausea. Seventy-one chemotherapy outpatients were interviewed before and after each chemotherapy infusion during their first 6 months of treatment. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis revealed that patients who developed anticipatory nausea were characterized by more severe posttreatment nausea, more time-consuming treatment infusions, and greater state anxiety relative to patients without anticipatory nausea. In general, results supported a respondent learning conceptualization of the development of anticipatory nausea. Clinical implications of these findings for the prevention of anticipatory nausea are suggested.

A Simple Stratification Factor Prognostic for Survival in Advanced Cancer: The Good/Bad/Uncertain Index

PURPOSE This article summarizes the third step of a research program to identify variables that supplement the predictive power of the the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) for survival. The objective was to produce a simple, practical, stratification factor for phase III oncology clinical trials involving patients with advanced malignant disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS A questionnaire was administered to 729 patients with metastatic colorectal or lung cancers. Patients provided a Karnofsky index and appetite rating while physicians provided a survival estimate and the ECOG-PS. Scores for each item were categorized as having a positive, neutral, or negative indication for survival. A patient was classified as having a relatively good prognosis if three or more of the four items showed a positive indication, a bad prognosis if three or more items were negative, and an uncertain prognosis otherwise (Good/Bad/Uncertain [GBU] index). RESULTS The GBU index improved on the prognostic power of a Cox model quartile index and PS alone and increased the accuracy of survival classification estimates by 5% to 10% more than ECOG-PS alone. For patients with PS of 0 or 1, significant survival patterns exist between GBU groups (P=.002 and.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION The GBU index may be recommended as a supplementary stratification factor for certain future phase III trials in metastatic lung or colorectal cancer where patient heterogeneity is a particular concern. The GBU represents a relatively modest increase to the cost and patient burden of a clinical trial given the additional control that is achieved over the potentially confounding concomitant to the treatment variable.

Phase III controlled evaluation of sucralfate to alleviate stomatitis in patients receiving fluorouracil-based chemotherapy.

PURPOSE Stomatitis is a major dose-limiting toxicity of bolus fluorouracil (5FU)-based chemotherapy regimens, despite the use of oral cryotherapy. Pursuant to preliminary data that suggested a sucralfate oral solution could alleviate chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis, we developed a prospective trial to test this contention. PATIENTS AND METHODS A phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was designed. Patients were entered onto the study at the time of the first cycle of 5FU-based chemotherapy. All patients received oral cryotherapy for 30 minutes with each dose of 5FU. In addition, each patient was randomized to receive either a sucralfate solution or a placebo solution to be used if they developed mouth tenderness or mouth sores. The study solution was to be used four times daily for 7 days starting on the first day of mouth tenderness or mouth sores. Stomatitis scores were determined by health care providers and by patients themselves. RESULTS There was a total of 131 assessable patients entered onto this trial, 50 of whom developed mucositis and used the study medication (27 sucralfate and 23 placebo). There was no suggestion of any difference in stomatitis severity or duration on either protocol arm. CONCLUSION The resultant data from this clinical trial did not support the prestudy hypothesis that sucralfate would be beneficial for the treatment of 5FU-induced stomatitis.

Prospectively randomized North Central Cancer Treatment Group trial of intensive-course fluorouracil combined with the l-isomer of intravenous leucovorin, oral leucovorin, or intravenous leucovorin for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE A three-arm randomized phase III trial in advanced colorectal cancer patients was designed to test whether substitution of an equivalent dose of (1) l-leucovorin or (2) oral leucovorin would more effectively potentiate fluorouracil (5-FU) than standard intravenous (I.V.) (d,l)-leucovorin. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 926 chemotherapy-naive patients participated. Patients received one of three treatments: (A) intensive-course 5-FU plus l-leucovorin with I.V. leucovorin (Immunex Corp, Seattle, WA) at 100 mg/m2 and I.V. 5-FU at 370 mg/m2; (B) intensive-course 5-FU plus oral (d,l)-leucovorin with oral leucovarin at 125 mg/m2 on hours 0, 1, 2, and 3 (total dose, 500 mg/m2) followed by 5-FU 370 mg/m2 on hour 4; or (C) intensive-course 5-FU plus I.V. (d,l)-leucovorin with I.V. leucovorin 200 mg/m2 and 5-FU 370 mg/m2. Drugs were administered daily for 5 consecutive days. Courses were repeated at 4 and 8 weeks, and every 5 weeks thereafter. Dosage was reduced for neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, stomatitis, and dermatitis. RESULTS Of 926 eligible patients, 756 have died. The overall response rate for patients with measurable disease was 32% (165 of 514). There were no differences between regimens in response rates (arm A, 28% [47 of 140]; arm B, 34% [60 of 174]; and arm C, 34% [58 of 170]) or in survival. There have been nine possible chemotherapy-related fatalities. Grade III to IV toxic effects did not differ appreciably by arm and included stomatitis (12% to 14%), diarrhea (15% to 19%), nausea (7% to 9%), and vomiting (6% to 8%). CONCLUSION There was no difference in response, survival, or toxicity between these three different leucovorin formulations combined with 5-FU.

A randomized phase II trial of two schedules of topotecan for the treatment of advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer

We conducted a randomized phase II trial of two different schedules of topotecan in patients with advanced-stage non small lung cancer (NSCLC) without prior cytotoxic chemotherapy. All patients had histologic or cytologic confirmation of stage IV (M1) or III-B NSCLC. Patients were stratified by performance status, stage and weight loss. Patients were randomized to receive topotecan at intravenous doses of 1.5 mg/m(2)/day over 30 min for 5 days every 3 weeks (Arm A) or 1.3 mg/m(2)grade 3 in both arms included leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, malaise, constipation, diarrhea, lethargy, pulmonary, vomiting, infection and myalgia. Severe (> or = grade 3) thrombocytopenia occurred in 15.8% of Arm A patients and 37.8% of Arm B patients and this difference was statistically significant (P=0.03). The median times to progression are 101 and 63 days (P=0. 75) and the median survival times are 257 and 179 days (P=0.83) for Arms A and B, respectively. These differences in time to progression and overall survival are not statistically significant. Topotecan has limited, single agent activity in advanced NSCLC when given as 1. 5 mg/m(2)/day over 30 min for 5 days every 3 weeks. We do not intend to pursue further investigations with topotecan in patients with NSCLC.

Cooperative groups and community hospitals. Measurement of impact in the community hospitals

The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, composed of major cancer treatment centers, has an outreach program which involves community hospitals in ongoing cancer clinical trials. A prevalence survey was carried out in February 1981 among 104 community hospitals and 21 member institutions to determine the characteristics of patients being treated, their staffing, and reasons why patients were not on protocol studies. The survey sampled 25 (50) consecutive patients from community hospitals (member institutions). The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of a community cancer control program. The results of the study demonstrated that 16% of patients surveyed in the affiliated community hospitals were being treated on a research protocol. In addition, a further 35% had their treatment plan influenced by a protocol. Consequently protocols have impacted directly or indirectly on 51% of the patients. The corresponding figures in member institutions were 23% and 38% for a total of 61%. In studying protocol availability, it was found that 66% of all patients were ineligible for any protocol. Of patients eligible for a protocol but not registered on one, 52% were not registered because of physician preference for a specific treatment. The affiliates surveyed were shown to be on average half as large as member institutions in terms of number of beds and staff size. Also, staff/patient ratios are generally smaller in the community hospitals. The median age of patients was considerably lower than SEER incidence data. Also, elderly patients were slightly more prevalent in community hospitals than in member institutions. A clear relationship between disease stage and age in breast cancer patients was noted with the representation of early‐stage disease much higher in young women.

Aziridinylbenzoquinone in recurrent, progressive glioma of the central nervous system. A phase ii study by the illinois cancer council

Aziridinylbenzoquinone (AZQ) was studied in a Phase II protocol for persons with glioma of the central nervous system (CNS) recurrent or progressive after surgery and radiotherapy. Patients received AZQ, 30 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks if previously untreated or 27.5 mg/m2 if previously exposed to cytotoxic drugs. Partial response was defined as a reduction of at least 50% reduction in the product of the two longest perpendicular diameters of the indicator lesion persisting for a minimum of 28 days. Twenty‐eight patients are evaluable for response at this time. Objective response (OR) occurred in four (14.3%): two complete and two partial. Stabilization of disease (SD) was seen in 7 (25.0%). Median survival, in weeks, was >46.0 for responders, 41.7 for SD, and 19.3 for those with progressive disease. The survival experiences are significantly different (P = 0.030 [Breslow]). The OR rate was 21.1% in 19 without prior chemotherapy and 0% in 9 previously treated patients. There were two AZQ‐related deaths in patients with prior exposure to nitrosoureas (1 CNS hemorrhage; 1 aspiration pneumonia). One patient had an anaphylactic reaction. Three patients whose tumor initially increased in size subsequently had marked tumor shrinkage. AZQ is an active agent that must be used with added caution in patients who have received nitrosoureas. Initial tumor enlargement may precede response. Although response appears to prolong survival, the correlation between stabilization of disease and survival is not well‐defined.