David B. Johnson

Tetracycline to prevent epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-induced skin rashes: Results of a placebo-controlled trial from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (N03CB)

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors are effective cancer therapies, but they are reported to cause a rash in >50% of patients. In the current study, the authors examined the use of tetracycline for rash prevention.

Efficacy of lamotrigine in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, N01C3.

Lamotrigine, an antiepileptic agent, has been reported as being effective in reducing symptoms of neuropathy associated with various etiologies. Based on such data, a multicenter double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomized trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of lamotrigine on pain and other neuropathic symptoms due to chemotherapy‐induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN).

Exemestane Versus Anastrozole in Postmenopausal Women With Early Breast Cancer: NCIC CTG MA.27—A Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial

PURPOSE In patients with hormone-dependent postmenopausal breast cancer, standard adjuvant therapy involves 5 years of the nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors anastrozole and letrozole. The steroidal inhibitor exemestane is partially non-cross-resistant with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors and is a mild androgen and could prove superior to anastrozole regarding efficacy and toxicity, specifically with less bone loss. PATIENTS AND METHODS We designed an open-label, randomized, phase III trial of 5 years of exemestane versus anastrozole with a two-sided test of superiority to detect a 2.4% improvement with exemestane in 5-year event-free survival (EFS). Secondary objectives included assessment of overall survival, distant disease-free survival, incidence of contralateral new primary breast cancer, and safety. RESULTS In the study, 7,576 women (median age, 64.1 years) were enrolled. At median follow-up of 4.1 years, 4-year EFS was 91% for exemestane and 91.2% for anastrozole (stratified hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.18; P = .85). Overall, distant disease-free survival and disease-specific survival were also similar. In all, 31.6% of patients discontinued treatment as a result of adverse effects, concomitant disease, or study refusal. Osteoporosis/osteopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, vaginal bleeding, and hypercholesterolemia were less frequent on exemestane, whereas mild liver function abnormalities and rare episodes of atrial fibrillation were less frequent on anastrozole. Vasomotor and musculoskeletal symptoms were similar between arms. CONCLUSION This first comparison of steroidal and nonsteroidal classes of aromatase inhibitors showed neither to be superior in terms of breast cancer outcomes as 5-year initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal breast cancer by two-way test. Less toxicity on bone is compatible with one hypothesis behind MA.27 but requires confirmation. Exemestane should be considered another option as up-front adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Long-Acting Methylphenidate for Cancer-Related Fatigue: North Central Cancer Treatment Group NCCTG-N05C7 Trial

PURPOSE Fatigue is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. This trial was developed to evaluate the efficacy of long-acting methylphenidate for improving cancer-related fatigue and to assess its toxicities. PATIENTS AND METHODS Adults with cancer were randomly assigned in a double-blinded manner to receive methylphenidate (target dose, 54 mg/d) or placebo for 4 weeks. The Brief Fatigue Inventory was the primary outcome measure, while secondary outcome measures included a Symptom Experience Diary (SED), the Short Form-36 (SF-36) Vitality Subscale, a linear analog self-assessment, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and the Subject Global Impression of Change. RESULTS In total, 148 patients were enrolled. Using an area under the serum concentration-time curve analysis, there was no evidence that methylphenidate, as compared with placebo, improved the primary end point of cancer-related fatigue in this patient population (P = .35). Comparisons of secondary end points, including clinically significant changes in quality-of-life variables and cancer-related fatigue change from baseline, were similarly negative. However, a subset analysis suggested that patients with more severe fatigue and/or with more advanced disease did have some fatigue improvement with methylphenidate (eg, in patients with stage III or IV disease, the mean improvement in usual fatigue was 19.7 with methylphenidate v 2.1 with placebo; P = .02). There was a significant difference in self-reported toxicities (SED), with increased levels of nervousness and appetite loss in the methylphenidate arm. CONCLUSION This clinical trial was unable to support the primary prestudy hypothesis that the chosen long-acting methylphenidate product would decrease cancer-related fatigue.

High-Dose Melphalan With Autotransplantation for Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results of a Southwest Oncology Group Phase II Trial

PURPOSE To evaluate high-dose melphalan followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with refractory multiple myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Multiple myeloma patients with alkylating agent or vincristine/doxorubicin/dexamethasone-refractory disease were eligible for the phase II multi-institutional Southwest Oncology Group trial S8993. Patients up to age 70 years were enrolled between April 15, 1991, and May 1, 1996. Patients without prior stem-cell collection were primed with high-dose cyclophosphamide (HD-CTX; 6 g/m(2)) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor. After stem-cell procurement, patients received melphalan 200 mg/m(2) with autologous transplantation. Upon recovery from melphalan, patients were to receive interferon alfa-2b until relapse. RESULTS Seventy-two patients were enrolled onto S8993; five were ineligible and one received no therapy. Of the 66 assessable patients, 56 patients underwent the transplant procedure; 54 were assessable for response and 56 for toxicity. The response to HD-CTX (n = 37) included three complete remissions (CRs; 8%) and five partial remissions (PR; 14%); response to melphalan (n = 54) included 16 CRs (30%) and 19 PRs (35%), for an overall CR and >/= PR (n = 66; intent-to-treat) of 27% and 58%, respectively. Toxicities included six treatment-related deaths: two during HD-CTX and four during transplantation. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) durations on an intent-to-treat basis from transplant registration was 11 months and 19 months (95% confidence interval, 14 to 29 months), respectively. The 3-year actuarial PFS and OS rates were 25% and 31%, respectively. CONCLUSION High-dose therapy with melphalan 200 mg/m(2) is feasible with high response rates (58% overall) and an OS of 19 months in patients with refractory multiple myeloma.

Phase III, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Three Doses of Citalopram for the Treatment of Hot Flashes: NCCTG Trial N05C9

PURPOSE Up to 75% of women experience hot flashes, which can negatively impact quality of life. As hot flash physiology is not definitively understood, it cannot be assumed that effective agents represent class effects. Therefore, there is a continued need for rigorous evaluation to identify effective nonhormonal options for hot flash relief. METHODS A randomized, double-blind trial evaluated citalopram at target doses of 10, 20, or 30 mg/d versus placebo for 6 weeks. Postmenopausal women with at least 14 bothersome hot flashes per week recorded hot flashes for 7 days before starting treatment and were then titrated to their target doses. The primary end point was the change from baseline to 6 weeks in hot flash score. RESULTS Two hundred fifty-four women were randomly assigned onto this study. Data for hot flash scores and frequencies showed significant improvement in hot flashes with citalopram over placebo, with no significant differences among doses. Reductions in mean hot flash scores were 2.0 (23%), 7.0 (49%), 7.7 (50%), and 10.7 (55%) for placebo and 10, 20, and 30 mg of citalopram, respectively (P <or= .002). Improvement in secondary outcomes, such as the Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale, was statistically superior in the 20-mg arm. Citalopram was well-tolerated, with no significant negative adverse effects. CONCLUSION Citalopram is an effective, well-tolerated agent in managing hot flashes. There does not appear to be a significant dose response above 10 mg/d, but broader helpful effects of the agent appear to be more evident at 20 mg/d.

Phase III Trial of Gabapentin Alone or in Conjunction With an Antidepressant in the Management of Hot Flashes in Women Who Have Inadequate Control With an Antidepressant Alone: NCCTG N03C5

PURPOSE Despite the utility of newer antidepressants for alleviating hot flashes, antidepressants do not work adequately enough in many patients. Gabapentin is a nonhormonal agent that also can reduce hot flashes. No data have been available to address whether the combination of both agents would more effectively alleviate hot flashes, compared with gabapentin alone, in patients with inadequate hot flash control with an antidepressant alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a randomized trial in which 118 patients with inadequate hot flash control on an antidepressant were randomly assigned to receive both an antidepressant and gabapentin versus being weaned off the antidepressant and receiving gabapentin alone. Patients were observed for 5 weeks (including a baseline week in which patients continued on their current antidepressant without gabapentin) during which time they completed validated daily hot flash diaries. RESULTS Ninety-one patients provided complete data at the 5-week assessment. Regardless of whether or not the antidepressant was continued when gabapentin was started, there was an approximately 50% median reduction in hot flash frequencies (54%; 95% CI, 34% to 70% for combined treatment v 49%; 95% CI, 26% to 58% for gabapentin alone) and scores (56%; 95% CI, 26% to 71% for combined treatment v 60%; 95% CI, 33% to 73% for gabapentin alone). CONCLUSION Gabapentin seems to decrease hot flashes by approximately 50% in women with inadequate hot flash control who were using an antidepressant. This study saw no significant additional hot flash reduction from continuation of the antidepressant.

Zoledronic acid for treatment of osteopenia and osteoporosis in women with primary breast cancer undergoing adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy

BACKGROUND Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis/osteopenia are at increased risk of fracture. Aromatase inhibitors further increase bone loss in these patients. This study evaluates whether zoledronic acid prevents the bone loss expected when these patients initiate letrozole. PATIENTS AND METHODS Postmenopausal women with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer and a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score <-2.0 were given letrozole 2.5mg/vitamin D 400 international units daily, calcium 500mg twice daily, and 4mg zoledronic acid every 6 months. The BMD was assessed at baseline and 1 year. The primary endpoint was the mean change in lumbar spine (LS) BMD at 1 year. RESULTS Forty-six patients completed 1 year of treatment. LS BMD increased by 2.66% (p=0.01), femoral neck (FN) by 4.81% (p=0.01), and any measured endpoint by 4.55% (p=0.0052). CONCLUSIONS Zoledronic acid prevents bone loss in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis/osteopenia starting letrozole and is associated with improvements in BMD.

A phase I/II study of bortezomib in combination with paclitaxel, carboplatin, and concurrent thoracic radiation therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer: North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG)-N0321.

Introduction: Despite the advances in radiation techniques and chemotherapy, survival with current platinum-based chemotherapy and concomitant thoracic radiation remains dismal. Bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, modulates apoptosis and cell cycle through disruption of protein degradation. The combination of bortezomib and carboplatin/paclitaxel and concurrent radiation in unresectable stage III non–small-cell lung cancer was evaluated in this phase I/II study. Methods: Patients with histologic or cytologic confirmed stage III nonmetastatic non–small-cell lung cancer who were candidates for radiation therapy were eligible. In the phase I portion, patients received escalating doses of bortezomib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin concomitantly with thoracic radiation (60 Gy/30 daily fractions) using a modified 3 + 3 design. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion was the 12-month survival rate (12MS). A one-stage design with an interim analysis yielded 81% power to detect a true 12MS of 75%, with a 0.09 level of significance if the true 12MS was 60% using a sample size of 60 patients. Secondary endpoints consisted of adverse events (AEs), overall survival, progression-free survival, and the confirmed response rate. Results: Thirty-one patients enrolled during the phase I portion of the trial, of which four cancelled before receiving treatment, leaving 27 evaluable patients. Of these 27 patients, two dose-limiting toxicities were observed, one (grade 3 pneumonitis) at dose level 1 (bortezomib at 0.5 mg/m2, paclitaxel at 150 mg/m2, and carboplatin at area under the curve of 5) and one (grade 4 neutropenia lasting ≥8 days) at dose level 6 (bortezomib 1.2 mg/m2, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, and carboplatin at area under the curve of 6). During the phase I portion, the most common grade 3 of 4 AEs were leukopenia (44%), neutropenia (37%), dyspnea (22%), and dysphagia (11%). Dose level 6 was declared to be the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and the phase II portion of the study opened. After the first 26 evaluable patients were enrolled to the RP2D, a per protocol interim analysis occurred. Of these 26 patients, 23 (88%) survived at least 6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 70–98%), which was enough to continue to full accrual per study design. However, due to slow accrual, the study was stopped after 27 evaluable patients were enrolled (6—phase I RP2D; 21—phase II). Of these 27 patients, the 12MS was 73% (95% CI, 58–92%), the median overall survival was 25.0 months (95% CI, 15.6–35.8), and the median progression-free survival was 8.4 months (95% CI, 4.1–10.5). The confirmed response rate was 26% (seven of 27; 95% CI, 11–46%), consisting of four partial responses and three complete responses. Grade 3+ and grade 4+ AEs occurred in 82% and 56% of patients, respectively. One patient experienced grade 5 pneumonitis that was possibly related to the treatment. Grade 3 and 4 hematological toxicities were observed in 82% and 56% patients, respectively. Conclusions: The addition of bortezomib to concurrent carboplatin/paclitaxel and radiation seemed to be feasible, although associated with increased hematological toxicities. A favorable median overall survival of 25 months suggests a potential benefit for this regimen.

A randomized comparison of once weekly epoetin alfa to extended schedule epoetin or darbepoetin in chemotherapy‐associated anemia

Erythropoiesis‐stimulating agents (ESAs) epoetin alfa (EA) and darbepoetin alfa (DA) increase hemoglobin (Hb) levels and reduce red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirements in patients with cancer chemotherapy‐associated anemia (CAA). Extended‐interval ESA dosing (administration less than once weekly) is common with DA, but previous studies suggested that EA might also be administered less often than weekly. In this multicenter prospective trial, 239 CAA patients with Hb <10.5 g/dL were randomized to receive EA 40,000 U subcutaneously once weekly (“40K” arm), EA 80,000 U every 3 weeks (“80K”), EA 120,000 U every 3 weeks (“120K” arm), or DA 500 mcg every 3 weeks (“DA”), for 15 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving Hb ≥ 11.5 g/dL or increment of Hb > 2.0 g/dL from baseline without transfusion. Secondary endpoints included transfusion requirements, adverse events (AEs), and patient‐reported outcomes (PROs). There were no significant differences between treatment arms in the proportion of patients achieving Hb response (68.9% for 40K, 61.7% for 80K, 65.5% for 120K, and 66.7% for DA; P > 0.41 for all comparisons) or requiring RBC transfusion, but the median Hb increment from baseline was higher in the 40K and DA arms compared to the two extended dosing EA arms, and Hb response was achieved soonest in the weekly EA arm. There were no differences in PROs or AEs. The FDA‐approved schedules tested—weekly EA 40,000 U, and every 3 week DA 500 mcg—are reasonable standards for CAA therapy. Am. J. Hematol. 90:877–881, 2015.