Drew K. Seisler

Phase III Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Study of Intravenous Calcium and Magnesium to Prevent Oxaliplatin-Induced Sensory Neurotoxicity (N08CB/Alliance)

PURPOSE Cumulative neurotoxicity is a prominent toxicity of oxaliplatin-based therapy. Intravenous calcium and magnesium have been extensively used to reduce oxaliplatin-induced neurotoxicity. This trial was designed to definitively test whether calcium/magnesium decreases oxaliplatin-related neurotoxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 353 patients with colon cancer undergoing adjuvant therapy with FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) were randomly assigned to intravenous calcium/magnesium before and after oxaliplatin, a placebo before and after, or calcium/magnesium before and placebo after. The primary end point was cumulative neurotoxicity measured by the sensory scale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy 20 tool. RESULTS There were no statistically significant neuropathy differences among the study arms as measured by the primary end point or additional measures of neuropathy, including clinician-determined measurement of the time to grade 2 neuropathy by using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scale or an oxaliplatin-specific neuropathy scale. In addition, calcium/magnesium did not substantially decrease oxaliplatin-induced acute neuropathy. CONCLUSION This study does not support using calcium/magnesium to protect against oxaliplatin-induced neurotoxicity.

Clinical Course of Oxaliplatin-Induced Neuropathy: Results From the Randomized Phase III Trial N08CB (Alliance)

PURPOSE Given that the clinical course of oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy is not well defined, the current study was performed to better understand clinical parameters associated with its presentation. METHODS Acute and chronic neuropathy was evaluated in patients receiving adjuvant FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) on study N08CB (North Central Cancer Treatment Group, Alliance). Acute neuropathy was assessed by having patients complete daily questionnaires for 6 days with each cycle of FOLFOX. Before each dose of FOLFOX and as long as 18 months after chemotherapy cessation, chronic neurotoxicity was assessed with use of the 20-item, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire for patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. RESULTS Three hundred eight (89%) of the 346 patients had at least one symptom of acute neuropathy with the first cycle of FOLFOX; these symptoms included sensitivity to touching cold items (71%), sensitivity to swallowing cold items (71%), throat discomfort (63%), or muscle cramps (42%). Acute symptoms peaked at day 3 and improved, although they did not always resolve completely between treatments. These symptoms were about twice as severe in cycles 2 through 12 as they were in cycle 1. For chronic neurotoxicity, tingling was the most severe symptom, followed by numbness and then pain. During chemotherapy, symptoms in the hands were more prominent than they were in the feet; by 18 months, symptoms were more severe in the feet than they were in the hands. Patients with more severe acute neuropathy during the first cycle of therapy experienced more chronic sensory neurotoxicity (P < .0001). CONCLUSION Acute oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy symptoms do not always completely resolve between treatment cycles and are only half as severe on the first cycle as compared with subsequent cycles. There is a correlation between the severities of acute and chronic neuropathies.

Effect of longer-interval vs standard dosing of zoledronic acid on skeletal events in patients with bone metastases: A randomized clinical trial

Importance Zoledronic acid, a third-generation aminobisphosphonate, reduces the incidence of skeletal-related events and pain in patients with bone metastases. The optimal dosing interval for zoledronic acid is uncertain. Objective To determine whether zoledronic acid administered every 12 weeks is noninferior to zoledronic acid administered every 4 weeks. Design, Setting, Participants Randomized, open-label clinical trial conducted at 269 academic and community sites in the United States. Patients (n = 1822) with metastatic breast cancer, metastatic prostate cancer, or multiple myeloma who had at least 1 site of bone involvement were enrolled between May 2009 and April 2012; follow-up concluded in April 2014. Interventions Patients were randomized to receive zoledronic acid administered intravenously every 4 weeks (n = 911) vs every 12 weeks (n = 911) for 2 years. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the proportion of patients having at least 1 skeletal-related event (defined as clinical fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation to bone, or surgery involving bone) within 2 years after randomization and a between-group absolute difference of 7% as the noninferiority margin. Secondary end points included the proportion of patients with at least 1 skeletal-related event by disease type, pain as assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (range, 0-10; higher scores indicate worse pain), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (range, 0-4; higher scores indicate worse disability), incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw, kidney dysfunction, skeletal morbidity rate (mean number of skeletal-related events per year), and, in a subset of 553 patients, suppression of bone turnover (assessed by C-terminal telopeptide levels). Results Among 1822 patients who were randomized (median age, 65 years; 980 [53.8%] women; 855 with breast cancer, 689 with prostate cancer, and 278 with multiple myeloma), 795 completed the study at 2 years. A total of 260 patients (29.5%) in the zoledronic acid every 4-week dosing group and 253 patients (28.6%) in the every 12-week dosing group experienced at least 1 skeletal-related event within 2 years of randomization (risk difference of −0.3% [1-sided 95% CI, −4% to ∞]; P < .001 for noninferiority). The proportions of skeletal-related events did not differ significantly between the every 4-week dosing group vs the every 12-week dosing group for patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, or multiple myeloma. Pain scores, performance status scores, incidence of jaw osteonecrosis, and kidney dysfunction did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. Skeletal morbidity rates were numerically identical in both groups, but bone turnover was greater (C-terminal telopeptide levels were higher) among patients who received zoledronic acid every 12 weeks. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with bone metastases due to breast cancer, prostate cancer, or multiple myeloma, the use of zoledronic acid every 12 weeks compared with the standard dosing interval of every 4 weeks did not result in an increased risk of skeletal events over 2 years. This longer interval may be an acceptable treatment option. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00869206

Metformin does not reduce markers of cell proliferation in esophageal tissues of patients with Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS Obesity is associated with neoplasia, possibly via insulin-mediated cell pathways that affect cell proliferation. Metformin has been proposed to protect against obesity-associated cancers by decreasing serum insulin. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study of patients with Barretts esophagus (BE) to assess the effect of metformin on phosphorylated S6 kinase (pS6K1), a biomarker of insulin pathway activation. METHODS Seventy-four subjects with BE (mean age, 58.7 years; 58 men [78%; 52 with BE >2 cm [70%]) were recruited through 8 participating organizations of the Cancer Prevention Network. Participants were randomly assigned to groups given metformin daily (increasing to 2000 mg/day by week 4, n = 38) or placebo (n = 36) for 12 weeks. Biopsy specimens were collected at baseline and at week 12 via esophagogastroduodenoscopy. We calculated and compared percent changes in median levels of pS6K1 between subjects given metformin vs placebo as the primary end point. RESULTS The percent change in median level of pS6K1 did not differ significantly between groups (1.4% among subjects given metformin vs -14.7% among subjects given placebo; 1-sided P = .80). Metformin was associated with an almost significant reduction in serum levels of insulin (median -4.7% among subjects given metformin vs 23.6% increase among those given placebo, P = .08) as well as in homeostatic model assessments of insulin resistance (median -7.2% among subjects given metformin vs 38% increase among those given placebo, P = .06). Metformin had no effects on cell proliferation (on the basis of assays for KI67) or apoptosis (on the basis of levels of caspase 3). CONCLUSIONS In a chemoprevention trial of patients with BE, daily administration of metformin for 12 weeks, compared with placebo, did not cause major reductions in esophageal levels of pS6K1. Although metformin reduced serum levels of insulin and insulin resistance, it did not discernibly alter epithelial proliferation or apoptosis in esophageal tissues. These findings do not support metformin as a chemopreventive agent for BE-associated carcinogenesis. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01447927.

Accrual of Older Patients With Breast Cancer to Alliance Systemic Therapy Trials Over Time: Protocol A151527

Purpose Despite increasing awareness of accrual challenges, it is unknown if accrual of older patients to breast cancer treatment trials is improving. Methods We examined accrual of older patients to Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology systemic therapy breast cancer trials during 1985-2012 and compared disease characteristics and reasons for therapy cessation for older (age ≥ 65 years and ≥ 70 years) versus younger (age < 65 years and < 70 years) participants. To examine accrual trends, we modeled age as a function of time, using logistic regression. Results Overall, 17% of study participants were ≥ 65 years of age. Approximately 15%, 24%, and 24% of participants in adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and metastatic trials were age ≥ 65 years, and 7%, 15%, and 13% were age ≥ 70 years, respectively. The odds of a patient age ≥ 65 years enrolling significantly increased over time for adjuvant trials (odds ratio [OR] per year, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.05) but decreased significantly for neoadjuvant and metastatic trials (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.67 and OR, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.00). Similar trends were seen for those age ≥ 70 years but these were statistically significant for adjuvant and neoadjuvant trials only (OR, 1.05, 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.07; and OR, 0.57, 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.62). In general, those age ≥ 65 years ( v those < 65 years) in adjuvant studies had a higher mean number of lymph nodes involved and more hormone receptor-negative tumors, although tumor sizes were similar. Early protocol treatment cessation was also more frequent in those age ≥ 65 years (50%) versus < 65 years (35.9%) across trials. Conclusion Older patients with breast cancer remain largely underrepresented in cooperative group therapeutic trials. We observed some improvement in accrual to adjuvant trials but worsening of accrual for neoadjuvant/metastatic trials. Novel strategies to increase accrual of older patients are critical to meaningfully change the evidence base for this growing patient population.

Feasibility assessment of patient reporting of symptomatic adverse events in multicenter cancer clinical trials

Importance In cancer clinical trials, symptomatic adverse events (AEs), such as nausea, are reported by investigators rather than by patients. There is increasing interest to collect symptomatic AE data via patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, but it is unclear whether it is feasible to implement this approach in multicenter trials. Objective To examine whether patients are willing and able to report their symptomatic AEs in multicenter trials. Design, Setting, and Participants A total of 361 consecutive patients enrolled in any 1 of 9 US multicenter cancer treatment trials were invited to self-report 13 common symptomatic AEs using a PRO adaptation of the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tablet computers at 5 successive clinic visits. Patient adherence was tracked with reasons for missed self-reports. Agreement with clinician AE reports was analyzed with weighted &kgr; statistics. Patient and investigator perspectives were elicited by survey. The study was conducted from March 15, 2007, to August 11, 2011. Data analysis was performed from August 9, 2013, to March 21, 2014. Results Of the 361 patients invited to participate, 285 individuals enrolled, with a median age of 57 years (range, 24-88), 202 (74.3%) female, 241 (85.5%) white, 73 (26.8%) with a high school education or less, and 176 (64.7%) who reported regular internet use (denominators varied owing to missing data). Across all patients and trials, there were 1280 visits during which patients had an opportunity to self-report (ie, patients were alive and enrolled in a treatment trial at the time of the visit). Self-reports were completed at 1202 visits (93.9% overall adherence). Adherence was highest at baseline and declined over time (visit 1, 100%; visit 2, 96%; visit 3, 95%; visit 4, 91%; and visit 5, 85%). Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (eg, staff forgetting to bring computers to patients at visits), patients feeling “too ill” in 8 (16.7%), patient refusal in 8 (16.7%), and internet connectivity problems in 5 (10.4%). Patient-investigator CTCAE agreement was moderate or worse for most symptoms (most &kgr; < 0.05), with investigators reporting fewer AEs than patients across symptoms. Most patients believed that the system was easy to use (234 [93.2%]) and useful (230 [93.1%]), and investigators thought that the patient-reported AEs were useful (133 [94.3%]) and accurate (119 [83.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance Participants in multicenter cancer trials are willing and able to report their own symptomatic AEs at most clinic visits and report more AEs than investigators. This approach may improve the precision of AE reporting in cancer trials.

Bioactivity of Oral Linaclotide in Human Colorectum for Cancer Chemoprevention

Guanylate cyclase C (GUCY2C) is a tumor-suppressing receptor silenced by loss of expression of its luminocrine hormones guanylin and uroguanylin early in colorectal carcinogenesis. This observation suggests oral replacement with a GUCY2C agonist may be an effective targeted chemoprevention agent. Linaclotide is an FDA-approved oral GUCY2C agonist formulated for gastric release, inducing fluid secretion into the small bowel to treat chronic idiopathic constipation. The ability of oral linaclotide to induce a pharmacodynamic response in epithelial cells of the colorectum in humans remains undefined. Here, we demonstrate that administration of 0.87 mg of oral linaclotide daily for 7 days to healthy volunteers, after oral colon preparation with polyethylene glycol solution (MoviPrep), activates GUCY2C, resulting in accumulation of its product cyclic (c)GMP in epithelial cells of the cecum, transverse colon, and distal rectum. GUCY2C activation by oral linaclotide was associated with homeostatic signaling, including phosphorylation of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein and inhibition of proliferation quantified by reduced Ki67-positive epithelial cells. In the absence of the complete oral colonoscopy preparation, linaclotide did not alter cGMP production in epithelial cells of the colorectum, demonstrating that there was an effect related to the laxative preparation. These data show that the current FDA-approved formulation of oral linaclotide developed for small-bowel delivery to treat chronic idiopathic constipation is inadequate for reliably regulating GUCY2C in the colorectum to prevent tumorigenesis. The study results highlight the importance of developing a novel GUCY2C agonist formulated for release and activity targeted to the large intestine for colorectal cancer prevention. Cancer Prev Res; 10(6); 345–54. ©2017 AACR.

A Randomized Phase IIb Trial of myo-Inositol in Smokers with Bronchial Dysplasia

Previous preclinical studies and a phase I clinical trial suggested that myo-inositol may be a safe and effective lung cancer chemopreventive agent. We conducted a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb study to determine the chemopreventive effects of myo-inositol in smokers with bronchial dysplasia. Smokers with ≥1 site of dysplasia identified by autofluorescence bronchoscopy-directed biopsy were randomly assigned to receive oral placebo or myo-inositol, 9 g once a day for 2 weeks, and then twice a day for 6 months. The primary endpoint was change in dysplasia rate after 6 months of intervention on a per-participant basis. Other trial endpoints reported herein include Ki-67 labeling index, blood and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BAL) levels of proinflammatory, oxidant/antioxidant biomarkers, and an airway epithelial gene expression signature for PI3K activity. Seventy-four (n = 38 myo-inositol and n = 36 placebo) participants with a baseline and 6-month bronchoscopy were included in all efficacy analyses. The complete response and the progressive disease rates were 26.3% versus 13.9% and 47.4% versus 33.3%, respectively, in the myo-inositol and placebo arms (P = 0.76). Compared with placebo, myo-inositol intervention significantly reduced IL6 levels in BAL over 6 months (P = 0.03). Among those with a complete response in the myo-inositol arm, there was a significant decrease in a gene expression signature reflective of PI3K activation within the cytologically normal bronchial airway epithelium (P = 0.002). The heterogeneous response to myo-inositol suggests a targeted therapy approach based on molecular alterations is needed in future clinical trials to determine the efficacy of myo-inositol as a chemopreventive agent. Cancer Prev Res; 9(12); 906–14. ©2016 AACR.

Frequency and impact of grade three or four toxicities of novel agents on outcomes of older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (alliance A151611)

OBJECTIVE Older patients with cancer suffer from chemotherapy-related toxicities more frequently than younger patients. As novel agents are being used more commonly in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), toxicities of these agents in older patients have not been well studied. Further, impact of these toxicities on outcomes in the elderly is unknown. This study aimed to answer both questions. PATIENTS AND METHODS We reviewed 14 Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology trials that enrolled CLL and/or NHL patients between 2004-2014. Toxicity was assessed per the NCI-CTCAE (version 3-5). Probabilities of experiencing grade three or four hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities were modeled as a function of clinical and disease-related factors using logistic regression. RESULTS 1199 patients (409 age ≥ 65; 790 age < 65) were analyzed; 438 received only biologic therapy (145 age ≥ 65; 293 age < 65), and 761 received biologic + chemotherapy (264 age ≥ 65; 497 age < 65). The odds of grade three or four hematologic [odds ratio (OR) 1.70; p = 0.009: 95% CI (1.57-1.84)] and non-hematologic toxicities [OR 1.47; p = 0.022; 95% CI (1.39-1.55)] were increased in older patients with CLL, as well as odds of grade three or four non-hematologic toxicities [OR 1.89; p = 0.017; 95% CI (1.64-2.17)] in older patients with NHL. Grade three or four hematologic toxicities were associated with inferior OS and PFS in older patients with NHL [HR 3.14; p = 0.006; 95% CI (2.25-4.39) for OS and 3.06; p = 0.011; 95% CI (2.10-4.45) for PFS], though not in CLL. A prognostic model predicting grade three or four toxicities was also developed. CONCLUSIONS CLL and NHL patients ≥ 65 year encounter more toxicities than younger patients even when treated with novel biologic agents. Development of grade three or four hematologic toxicities lead to inferior PFS and OS in NHL but not in CLL.

Comparative "nocebo effects" in older patients enrolled in cancer therapeutic trials: Observations from a 446-patient cohort

A nocebo is an inert substance associated with adverse events. Although previous studies have examined the positive (placebo) effects of such inert substances, few have examined negative (nocebo) adverse event profiles, particularly in older patients who have higher morbidity and can experience frequent and severe adverse events from cancer therapy.