Back to Authors

Patterson, Sherri

Mayo Clinic

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Citations 2

An international randomised trial of celecoxib versus celecoxib plus difluoromethylornithine in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis
Lynch, Patrick M, Burke, Carol A. , Phillips, Robin, Morris, Jeffrey S. , Slack, Rebecca, Wang, Xuemei , Liu, Jun , Patterson, Sherri, Rodrı́guez-Bigas, Miguel A. , Half, Elizabeth , Bülow, Steffen, Latchford, Andrew , Clark, Sue, Ross, William A., Malone, Bonnie, Hasson, Hennie, Hawk, Ernest T. , Lynch, Patrick M, Sinicrope, Frank A. , Richmond, Ellen S. , Burke, Carol A

Gut | March 20, 2015 | Volume: 65 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 286-295

10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307235 Get It

Background and aim Although Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce colorectal adenoma burden in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), the utility of combining chemopreventive agents in FAP is not known. We conducted a randomised trial of celecoxib (CXB) versus CXB+diflouromethylornithine (DFMO) to determine the synergistic effect, if any. Methods The primary endpoint was % change in adenoma count in a defined field. Secondary endpoints were adenoma burden (weighted by adenoma diameter) and video review of entire colon/rectal segments. Adverse event (AEs) were monitored by National Cancer Institution toxicity criteria. Results 112 subjects were randomised: 60 men and 52 women at a mean age of 38 years. For the 89 patients who had landmark-matched polyp counts available at baseline and 6 months, the mean % change in adenoma count over the 6 months of trial was −13.0% for CXB+DFMO and −1.0% for CXB (p=0.69). Mean % change in adenoma burden was −40% (CXB+DFMO) vs −27% (CXB) (p=0.13). Video-based global polyp change was −0.80 for CXB+DFMO vs −0.33 for CXB (p=0.03). Fatigue was the only significant AE, worse on the CXB arm (p=0.02). Conclusions CXB combined with DFMO yielded moderate synergy according to a video-based global assessment. No significant difference in adenoma count, the primary endpoint, was seen between the two study arms. No evidence of DFMO-related ototoxicity was seen. There were no adverse cardiovascular outcomes in either trial arm and no significant increase in AEs in the CXB+DFMO arm of the trial. Differences in outcomes between primary and secondary endpoints may relate to sensitivity of the endpoint measures themselves. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov number N01-CN95040.
Conference Report: Eighth Annual AACR International Conference on Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research
Brewster, Abenaa M. , Patterson, Sherri, Forman, Michele R. , Wetter, David W. , Hawk, Ernest T. , Halbert, Chanita Hughes , Limburg, Paul J. , Ondrey, Frank G. , Paskett, Electra D.

Cancer Prevention Research | July 28, 2010 | Volume: 3 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1044-1048

10.1158/1940-6207.capr-10-0141 Get It

Abstract The Eighth Annual Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research meeting was held in Houston, Texas, in November 2009. This report highlights significant presentations that advance the fields of chemoprevention, clinical trial recruitment and retention, cancer screening including optical imaging, energy balance, and nutritional epidemiology, and health communications and decision making. In findings from the randomized Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events trial, dutasteride reduced the risk of biopsy-detectable prostate cancer in high-risk men by 23% compared with placebo. Important clues about the dosing and window of susceptibility for supplementation with choline, vitamin D, and folate were revealed from epigenetic research that has implications for future nutritional epidemiology research. Noninvasive optical imaging techniques using endoscopic ultrasound and autofluorescence for the early detection of cancers in the lung, pancreas, and oral cavity are being studied. The report also addresses the challenges of promoting cancer prevention. Understanding how individuals process risk information and make sustained behavior changes and the effect of socioeconomic status on health disparities were identified as critical areas of research. This multidisciplinary research meeting of basic, clinical, and behavioral scientists and epidemiologists continues to play a major role in identifying the research priority areas of cancer prevention, elucidating new mechanisms of carcinogenesis for targeted chemoprevention therapies and delivering a comprehensive strategy for engaging individuals in the unifying goal to reduce cancer incidence. Cancer Prev Res; 3(8); 1044–8. ©2010 AACR.