James D. Bearden

Effect of Selenium and Vitamin E on Risk of Prostate Cancer and Other Cancers: The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT)

CONTEXT Secondary analyses of 2 randomized controlled trials and supportive epidemiologic and preclinical data indicated the potential of selenium and vitamin E for preventing prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE To determine whether selenium, vitamin E, or both could prevent prostate cancer and other diseases with little or no toxicity in relatively healthy men. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A randomized, placebo-controlled trial (Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial [SELECT]) of 35,533 men from 427 participating sites in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico randomly assigned to 4 groups (selenium, vitamin E, selenium + vitamin E, and placebo) in a double-blind fashion between August 22, 2001, and June 24, 2004. Baseline eligibility included age 50 years or older (African American men) or 55 years or older (all other men), a serum prostate-specific antigen level of 4 ng/mL or less, and a digital rectal examination not suspicious for prostate cancer. INTERVENTIONS Oral selenium (200 microg/d from L-selenomethionine) and matched vitamin E placebo, vitamin E (400 IU/d of all rac-alpha-tocopheryl acetate) and matched selenium placebo, selenium + vitamin E, or placebo + placebo for a planned follow-up of minimum of 7 years and a maximum of 12 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Prostate cancer and prespecified secondary outcomes, including lung, colorectal, and overall primary cancer. RESULTS As of October 23, 2008, median overall follow-up was 5.46 years (range, 4.17-7.33 years). Hazard ratios (99% confidence intervals [CIs]) for prostate cancer were 1.13 (99% CI, 0.95-1.35; n = 473) for vitamin E, 1.04 (99% CI, 0.87-1.24; n = 432) for selenium, and 1.05 (99% CI, 0.88-1.25; n = 437) for selenium + vitamin E vs 1.00 (n = 416) for placebo. There were no significant differences (all P>.15) in any other prespecified cancer end points. There were statistically nonsignificant increased risks of prostate cancer in the vitamin E group (P = .06) and type 2 diabetes mellitus in the selenium group (relative risk, 1.07; 99% CI, 0.94-1.22; P = .16) but not in the selenium + vitamin E group. CONCLUSION Selenium or vitamin E, alone or in combination at the doses and formulations used, did not prevent prostate cancer in this population of relatively healthy men. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00006392.

Consolidation Docetaxel After Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Stage IIIB Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Phase II Southwest Oncology Group Study S9504

PURPOSE To test the concept of taxane sequencing in combined-modality therapy, this phase II trial (S9504) evaluated consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with pathologically documented stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results were compared with those of the predecessor study (S9019) with identical eligibility, staging criteria, and treatment, excepting docetaxel consolidation. PATIENTS AND METHODS Treatment consisted of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 29, and 36, etoposide 50 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5 and 29 through 33, and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy (total dose of 61 Gy). Consolidation docetaxel started 4 to 6 weeks after chemoradiotherapy at an initial dose of 75 mg/m2. RESULTS Stage subsets (tumor-node-metastasis system) in 83 eligible patients were as follows: T4N0/1, 31 patients (37%); T4N2, 22 patients (27%), and T1-3N3, 30 patients (36%). Concurrent chemoradiotherapy was generally well tolerated, but two patients died from probable radiation-associated pneumonitis. Neutropenia during consolidation docetaxel was common (57% with grade 4) and most frequent during escalation to 100 mg/m2. Median progression-free survival was 16 months, median survival was 26 months, and 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 76%, 54%, and 37%, respectively. Brain metastasis was the most common site of failure. In S9019, median survival was 15 months and 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 58%, 34%, and 17%, respectively. CONCLUSION Consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIB NSCLC is feasible and generally tolerable, and results compare favorably with the predecessor trial S9019. Nevertheless, this study remains hypothesis-generating and does not provide definitive evidence of the benefit of this approach. Phase III trials evaluating the S9504 regimen have been initiated to validate these results.

Randomized Trial of 3-Hour Versus 24-Hour Infusion of High-Dose Paclitaxel in Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Breast Cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-26

PURPOSE Paclitaxel is an active drug for the treatment of breast cancer; however, the appropriate duration of administration is unknown. We assessed and compared the response rate, event-free survival, survival, and toxicity of paclitaxel 250 mg/m(2) delivered every 3 weeks as a 3-hour or 24-hour infusion. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 563 women with stage IV or IIIB breast cancer were randomized into one of two groups: 279 received 3-hour paclitaxel and 284 received 24-hour paclitaxel. Patients were stratified by age, stage of disease, and prior therapy. RESULTS A significantly higher rate of tumor response occurred in the first four cycles of therapy in patients who received the 24-hour infusion of paclitaxel (51% v 41%, respectively; P =.025). Tumor response over all cycles was also significantly higher in the group that received 24-hour infusion (54% v 44%, respectively; P =.023). There were no significant differences in event-free survival or survival between the two arms of the study (P =.9 and.8, respectively). No treatment by stage or by age interactions were observed. During the first four cycles of therapy, at least one episode of >/= grade 3 toxicity (excluding nadir hematologic values, alopecia, and weight change) occurred in 45% of patients who received the 3-hour paclitaxel infusion and in 50% of those who received the 24-hour paclitaxel infusion. Febrile neutropenia, >/= grade 3 infection, and >/= grade 3 stomatitis were less frequent, and severe neurosensory toxicity was more frequent in those who received the 3-hour paclitaxel infusion. Ten treatment-related deaths occurred in the first four cycles. Age, stage, and prior chemotherapy did not influence the effect of treatment. CONCLUSION When administered as a continuous 24-hour infusion, high-dose paclitaxel results in a higher tumor response rate than when administered as a 3-hour infusion but does not significantly improve event-free survival or survival. Paclitaxel as a 24-hour infusion results in increased hematologic toxicity and decreased neurosensory toxicity.

Randomized Study of CODE Versus Alternating CAV/EP for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: An Intergroup Study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group and the Southwest Oncology Group

PURPOSE To determine whether an intensive weekly chemotherapy regimen plus thoracic irradiation is superior to standard chemotherapy in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ESCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with ESCLC were considered eligible for the study if they were younger than 68 years, had a performance status of 0 to 2, and were free of brain metastases. Patients were randomized to receive cisplatin, vincristine, doxorubicin, and etoposide (CODE) or alternating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine/etoposide and cisplatin (CAV/EP). Consolidative thoracic irradiation and prophylactic cranial irradiation were given to patients responding to CODE and according to investigator discretion on the CAV/EP arm. RESULTS The fidelity of drug delivery on both drug regimens was equal, and more than 70% of all patients received the intended protocol chemotherapy. Although rates of neutropenic fever were similar, nine (8.2%) of 110 patients on the CODE arm died during chemotherapy, whereas one (0.9%) of 109 patients died on the CAV/EP arm. Response rates after chemotherapy were higher (P =.006) with CODE (87%) than with CAV/EP (70%). However, progression-free survival (median of 0.66 years on both arms) and overall survival (median, 0.98 years for CODE and 0. 91 years for CAV/EP) were not statistically different. CONCLUSION The CODE regimen increased two-fold the received dose-intensity of four of the most active drugs in small-cell lung cancer compared with the standard CAV/EP regimen while maintaining an approximately equal total dose. Despite supportive care (but not routine prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor), there was excessive toxic mortality with the CODE regimen. The response rate with CODE was higher than that of CAV/EP, but progression-free and overall survival were not significantly improved. In view of increased toxicity and similar efficacy, the CODE chemotherapy regimen is not recommended for treatment of ESCLC.

Phase III Comparison of Depomedroxyprogesterone Acetate to Venlafaxine for Managing Hot Flashes: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial N99C7

PURPOSE Vasomotor hot flashes are a common problem in menopausal women. Given concerns regarding estrogen and/or combined hormonal therapy, other treatment options are desired. Prior trials have confirmed that progestational agents and newer antidepressants effectively reduce hot flashes. This current trial compared a single intramuscular dose of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), depot preparation, versus daily oral venlafaxine as treatment for hot flashes. METHODS Women with bothersome hot flashes were entered onto this trial, were randomly assigned to treatment, and then had a baseline week where hot flash scores were recorded without treatment. They were then treated and observed for 6 weeks; daily diaries were used to measure hot flash frequencies and severities. There were 109 patients per each arm randomly assigned to receive MPA 400 mg intramuscularly for a single dose versus venlafaxine 37.5 mg per day for a week, then 75 mg per day. RESULTS During the sixth week after random assignment, hot flash scores were reduced by 55% in the venlafaxine arm versus 79% in the MPA arm (P < .0001). In an intention-to-treat analysis, 46% of venlafaxine patients (50 of 109) compared with 74% of the MPA patients (81 of 109) had a decrease in hot flashes by more than 50% from baseline (P < .0001). Less toxicity was reported in the MPA arm. CONCLUSION A single MPA dose seems to be well tolerated and more effectively reduces hot flashes than does venlafaxine.

Weekly docetaxel versus docetaxel/gemcitabine in the treatment of elderly or poor performance status patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network.

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of single‐agent weekly docetaxel with the combination of docetaxel and gemcitabine in elderly and/or poor performance status patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Mometasone Furoate Effect on Acute Skin Toxicity in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Radiotherapy: A Phase III Double-Blind, Randomized Trial From the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N06C4

PURPOSE A two-arm, double-blind, randomized trial was performed to evaluate the effect of 0.1% mometasone furoate (MMF) on acute skin-related toxicity in patients undergoing breast or chest wall radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast carcinoma who were undergoing external beam radiotherapy to the breast or chest wall were randomly assigned to apply 0.1% MMF or placebo cream daily. The primary study endpoint was the provider-assessed maximal grade of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0, radiation dermatitis. The secondary endpoints included provider-assessed Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Grade 3 or greater radiation dermatitis and adverse event monitoring. The patient-reported outcome measures included the Skindex-16, the Skin Toxicity Assessment Tool, a Symptom Experience Diary, and a quality-of-life self-assessment. An assessment was performed at baseline, weekly during radiotherapy, and for 2 weeks after radiotherapy. RESULTS A total of 176 patients were enrolled between September 21, 2007, and December 7, 2007. The provider-assessed primary endpoint showed no difference in the mean maximum grade of radiation dermatitis by treatment arm (1.2 for MMF vs. 1.3 for placebo; p = .18). Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events toxicity was greater in the placebo group (p = .04), primarily from pruritus. For the patient-reported outcome measures, the maximum Skindex-16 score for the MMF group showed less itching (p = .008), less irritation (p = .01), less symptom persistence or recurrence (p = .02), and less annoyance with skin problems (p = .04). The groups maximal Skin Toxicity Assessment Tool score showed less burning sensation (p = .02) and less itching (p = .002). CONCLUSION Patients receiving daily MMF during radiotherapy might experience reduced acute skin toxicity compared with patients receiving placebo.

Impact of a Peer-Delivered Telephone Intervention for Women Experiencing a Breast Cancer Recurrence

PURPOSE A first breast cancer recurrence creates considerable distress, yet few psychosocial interventions directed at this population have been reported. The Southwest Oncology Group conducted a phase III randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief telephone intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS Three hundred five women experiencing a first recurrence of breast cancer were randomly assigned to standard care or intervention. The intervention consisted of four to eight telephone calls delivered over a 1-month period. The calls were conducted by trained peer counselors at a breast cancer advocacy organization, the Y-ME National Breast Cancer Organization, and followed a standard curriculum. Psychosocial distress (Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System-Short Form [CARES-SF]) and depressive symptoms (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale [CES-D]) outcomes were assessed at baseline and 3 and 6 months. The 3-month assessment was the primary end point and is the focus of this article. RESULTS Analysis revealed no differences in distress or depressive symptoms at 3 months between the intervention and control groups; at 3 months, 70% of control patients and 66% of intervention patients reported psychosocial distress, and 40% of control patients and 47% of intervention patients exhibited depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION Telephone peer counseling did not lead to better psychosocial outcomes. The persistent distress in these women supports the urgent need for the development and testing of more intensive or different supportive interventions for this group of patients.

A phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of gabapentin in the management of hot flashes in men (N00CB)

INTRODUCTION Hot flashes represent a significant problem in men undergoing androgen deprivation therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Via a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, men with hot flashes, on a stable androgen deprivation therapy program for prostate cancer, received a placebo or gabapentin at target doses of 300, 600, or 900 mg/day. Hot flash frequencies and severities were recorded daily during a baseline week and for 4 weeks while the patients took the study medication. RESULTS In the 214 eligible patients who began the study drug on this trial, comparing the fourth treatment week to the baseline week, mean hot flash scores decreased in the placebo group by 4.1 units and in the three increasing dose gabapentin groups by, 3.2, 4.6, and 7.0 units. Comparing the three combined gabapentin arms to the placebo arm did not result in significant hot flash differences. Wilcoxon rank-sum P values for change in hot flash scores and frequencies after 4 weeks of treatment were 0.10 and 0.02, comparing the highest dose gabapentin arm to the placebo arm, respectively. The gabapentin was well tolerated in this trial. CONCLUSION These results support that gabapentin decreases hot flashes, to a moderate degree, in men with androgen ablation-related vasomotor dysfunction.

Phase III Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of Two Doses of Megestrol Acetate as Treatment for Menopausal Symptoms in Women With Breast Cancer: Southwest Oncology Group Study 9626

PURPOSE Prior progestin studies treating hot flashes in women have been short duration and single dose. This study tests the progestin megestrol acetate (MA) at two doses versus placebo over 6 months. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with T1-3, N0-1, M0 breast cancer were eligible after completion of surgery and chemotherapy and at least 4 months of tamoxifen (if prescribed). Women were required to have at least 10 hot flashes of any severity or at least five severe episodes per week. Patients were randomly assigned to placebo, MA 20 mg, or MA 40 mg for 3 months. Success at 3 months was defined as completion of treatment with a >or= 75% reduction in hot flashes from baseline. If success was achieved, drug treatment for another 3 months was given on the same blinded arm; if not, open-label MA 20 mg was added to blinded study drug and continued for 3 months. Other menopausal symptoms were also assessed. RESULTS Two hundred eighty eight eligible women were randomly assigned (286 eligible), of whom 85% were on tamoxifen, 40% had over 63 hot flashes/week, and 75% had vasomotor symptoms for >or= 6 months. Success at 3 months was 14% on placebo, 65% on 20 mg, and 48% on 40 mg (both MA doses superior to placebo; P < .0001). Most successes at 3 months were maintained at 6 months (77% on 20 mg and 81% on 40 mg). CONCLUSION MA significantly reduced vasomotor symptoms with durable benefit over 6 months. MA 20 mg/d is the preferred dose. There was no significant impact on other menopausal symptoms.