Loprinzi, Charles L.

9532 Background: Chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) continues to be a substantial problem for many cancer patients (pts). Pursuant to promising appearing pilot data, the current study evaluated the use of vitamin E for the prevention of CIPN. Methods: A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study was conducted in pts undergoing therapy with neurotoxic chemotherapy, utilizing twice daily dosing of vitamin E (400mg)/placebo. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 2+ sensory neuropathy (SN) toxicity (CTCAE v 3.0) in each treatment arm, analyzed by Chi-square testing. Major eligibility criteria included: planned curative intent adjuvant chemotherapy with neurotoxic chemotherapy, ≥ 18 years of age, ECOG PS of ≤2, no existing peripheral neuropathy or coronary artery disease, no prior treatment with neurotoxic chemotherapy, and no concurrent treatment with neuropathic or opioid pain medication. Planned sample size was 100 patients per arm, to provide 80% power to detect a difference in incidence of grade 2+ SN toxicity from 25% in the placebo group to 10% in the vitamin E group. Results: Two-hundred seven pts were enrolled between 12/01/2006 and 12/14/2007. Cytotoxic agents included taxanes (109), cisplatin (8), carboplatin (2), oxaliplatin (50) or combination (20). Eleven pts canceled prior to starting treatment and there were 7 ineligible pts on study. Thus there were 189 evaluable pts included in the current analysis. In this analysis, there was no difference in the incidence of grade 2+ SN between the 2 arms (vitamin E- 34% [95% CI- 25.0–44.8%] placebo- 29% [20.1–39.4%]; P=0.43). There, likewise, were no significant differences between treatment arms for time to onset of neuropathy (P= 0.72), for chemotherapy dose reductions due to neuropathy (P= 0.21) or patient questionnaire reported neuropathy symptoms. The treatment was well tolerated overall. Conclusions: Vitamin E did not appear to reduce the incidence of sensory neuropathy in the studied group of patients receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy but it appeared to be well tolerated. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

9531 Background: Chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a prevalent dose limiting toxicity for several important cancer treatment agents. CIPN can impair function and cause distress. There are no proven pharmacologic treatments for established CIPN currently. This double blind randomized placebo controlled trial evaluated a compounded topical gel for this problem. The novelty of this treatment is that it might incorporate several agents with different mechanisms of action to provide relief locally without negative systemic effects. Methods: Patients with CIPN (rated ≥4 out of 10) for at least one month, related to previous and/or concurrent exposure to neurotoxic agents, were randomized to baclofen 10 mg, amitriptyline HCL 40 mg and ketamine 20 mg in a pluronic lecithin organogel (BAK-PLO) vs placebo (PLO) to determine its effect on numbness, tingling, pain, and motor function. Exclusion criteria included other causes and/or current treatment for peripheral neuropathy. The primary endpoint was the baseline adjusted sensory subscale of the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20, at 4 weeks. Results: Between February and May 2008, 208 patients were enrolled onto this trial. Four week data are shown in the table below, higher numbers being better. The percentage of patients that had improvements of at least 10, on a 100 point scale, in the motor subscale was statistically significantly higher in the BAK-PLO arm, p=.04. There were no unwanted toxicities associated with the BAK-PLO that were significantly different from placebo and no evidence of CNS or systemic toxicity. Conclusions: Topical treatment with BAK-PLO appears to moderately improve symptoms of CIPN. This topical gel was well tolerated without systemic side effects. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

9513 Background: Hot flashes are a major problem in many women for which better treatment options are needed. Given the known efficacy of gabapentin for decreasing hot flashes, it was decided to evaluate pregabalin, with hopes that it would work better and/or with fewer toxicities. Methods: A three-arm, double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial was developed. Women with bothersome hot flashes (at least 28/week) were randomized to receive either a placebo or target pregabalin oral doses of 75 mg bid or 150 mg bid (starting at 50 mg/d and then increasing the dose at weekly intervals to 50 mg bid, then 75 mg bid, and then, in the higher dose arm, 150 mg bid); patients were treated for 6 weeks. Hot flash numbers and scores (hot flash number times mean severity) were measured using a validated daily hot flash diary. A one-week baseline period preceded initiation of study tablets. The primary endpoint was the average intra-patient difference in hot flash score between baseline and week six, comparing the higher dose pregabalin arm and the placebo arm. With the planned sample size of 55 patients per arm, there was an 80% power and two-sided 5% Type I error rate to detect a difference of 0.54 standard deviations, or 1.08 hot flashes per day, or 2.7 units of hot flash score per day. Results: 207 patients were randomized between 6/20/2008 and 8/21/2008. The study arms were well balanced. Mean/median daily hot flash scores and frequencies for all pts at baseline were 15.7/13.4 and 8.3/7.7, respectively. The table shows the decreases in hot flashes from the baseline to the sixth treatment week. Larger numbers illustrate greater hot flash reductions. Toxicity information, quality of life information, and information regarding the effects of hot flashes on subjective symptoms will be available at the meeting time. Conclusions: Pregabalin reduces hot flashes in women. There appears to be similar effects with both studied doses. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

4044 Background: To aid in decisions regarding adjuvant therapy (AT) for resected high-risk CC, two prog models are in common use: the Mayo Clinic NUM calculator developed from a pooled data analysis of 7 randomized 5FU-based AT trials, and ADJ! developed using SEER data. This study examines the accuracy of NUM and ADJ! utilizing a cohort of patients (pts) referred to the BC Cancer Agency (BCCA). Methods: Demographic, disease and treatment data for pts with stage II/III CC referred to the BCCA from 1995–1996 + 1999–2003 were collected. Observed (obs) 5-year relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared to predicted estimates (pred) using NUM and ADJ!, both overall and for all prog subgroups with ≥ 10pts, as stratified by T stage, N stage, tumor grade and age. Data are presented in a descriptive manner and using confidence intervals. Results: Median follow-up was 5.6 yrs for 2,033 pts - 53% male, median age 68y, 40% N0. The mean percentages of 5 year pred outcomes for each of the two models and the actual Kaplan Meier mean survivals are presented in the table . The percentage correct predictions of 5 y status is also presented, with correctness deemed accurate if the pt was alive and predicted to be alive by ≥ 50% as determined by each model or dead while the respective tool predicted < 50% possibility of being alive. For surgery alone pts, ADJ!pred were more often closer to what was observed, as compared to NUMpred, in the prog subgroups (for RFS 56%, OS 88%). For surgery + 5-FU pts, within these subgroups, NUMpred were more often closer to what was observed, as compared to ADJ!pred, for RFS (62%) and for OS (55%). Conclusions: In this independent population-based validation, NUM and ADJ! have acceptable and similar reliability with modest over-estimations of 5y RFS and OS. Both models thus appear to be useful adjuvant decision-aids. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

4025 Background: Cumulative sNT is the dose-limiting toxicity of oxaliplatin which commonly leads to early discontinuation of oxaliplatin-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant setting. We recently demonstrated the protective effect of CaMg against oxaliplatin-induced sNT as assessed by NCI-CTC (Nikcevich ASCO 2008). It is unclear, though, if CaMg reduced acute and/or chronic, cumulative sNT. Methods: 104 pts with colon cancer undergoing adjuvant therapy with FOLFOX were randomized to IV CaMg (1g calcium gluconate plus 1g magnesium sulfate pre- and post-oxaliplatin) or placebo (PL) in a double-blinded manner. NCI-CTC, an oxaliplatin-specific sNT scale and patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires were used to differentially assess the effect of CaMg on acute (effect on sNT on days 1–4 after oxaliplatin) and chronic sNT (area between curves over whole course of therapy). Results: A total of 102 pts (50 CaMg, 52 PL; 96 mFOLFOX6, 6 FOLFOX4) were available for analysis. Apart from a strong reduction in muscle cramps with CaMg (p=0.002), no difference was found between CaMg and PL in PRO with regard to items reflecting acute sNT (e.g. sensitivity to cold, swallowing of cold liquids, throat discomfort) on days 1–4 after oxaliplatin of any treatment cycle. In contrast, CaMg was able to significantly reduce cumulative sNT in form of numbness in fingers (p=0.02), impaired ability to button shirts (p=0.05), tingling in fingers (p=0.06), and muscle cramps over the course of therapy (p=0.01). Conclusions: In our phase III, placebo-controlled trial, CaMg was able to significantly reduce chronic, cumulative sNT related to oxaliplatin as evaluated by specific PRO questionnaires. No effect was noted on phenomena associated with acute sNT. CaMg can be recommended as neuroprotectant against oxaliplatin-related chronic sNT, oxaliplatin's dose-limiting toxicity. [Table: see text]

e15031 Background: Two web based prognostic calculators, Adjuvant! and Numeracy (JCO 22:1797–1806, 2004) are widely used to provide individual patient outcome predictions to aid decisions regarding adjuvant therapy for colon cancer. The comparability of these tools has not been studied yet. The aim of this project was to assess whether the Numeracy and Adjuvant! Colon cancer prognostic tools produced similar results for patients with resected stage II and III colon cancer based on a set of hypothetical patients. Methods: All possible hypothetical scenarios were formulated for the Numeracy calculator based on all potential combinations of age, lymph nodes status, tumor stage, and grade of tumor. These were applied to three post- surgical therapy choices: observation, 5-FU (5-fluorouracil), or FOLFOX (5-FU, leucovorin and oxaliplatin). Predictions for these hypothetical scenarios (N= 192 for males and 192 for females) were also entered into the Adjuvant! Program. Predicted relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were obtained using both calculators. Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to compare the numerical predictions between the calculators for each outcome. Results: In the majority of the 384 hypothetical patient scenarios, predictions for RFS and OS from Adjuvant! were statistically significantly higher than from Numeracy (p value < 0.05), except for age≥70 for FOLFOX, and the number of positive nodes of 0 and 1–4 using FOLFOX, among males. The net estimate of benefit for RFS and OS for 5-FU over surgery, obtained from Adjuvant! and Numeracy, were similar (for both males and females), but the benefit in RFS and OS for FOLFOX over 5-FU obtained from Adjuvant! was significantly lower than the estimate obtained from Numeracy (p value < 0.05). Conclusions: Based on a hypothetical set of patients with resected stage II and III colon cancer, the estimated benefit in RFS and OS of FOLFOX over 5-FU based chemotherapy is lower in Adjuvant! than in the Numeracy tool (but benefit for 5-FU over surgery alone is similar). Further studies are needed to clarify the discrepancy and to assess which of these tools most accurately reflects actual patient outcome. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract The words cure and hope are important terms in oncology, reflecting a balance of aspirations and realism for physicians and patients. Yet, some have suggested that oncologists are reluctant to use these terms. We tested this hypothesis by performing a bibliometric analysis of the frequency of use of these words in JAMA Oncology (JAMA Oncol) and the Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO). The text of all articles in 3 categories—primary research, editorials, and narrative essays—appearing in JCO from 2000 to 2018 and in JAMA Oncol from 2015 to 2019 was analyzed. These analyses compared, across these categories, the proportion of articles containing the words cure and hope, as well as the proportion of total sentences containing these words. There were statistically significant differences in frequency of the use of the terms cure and hope as a function of the type of article published in the JCO and JAMA Oncol (2-sided P values ranging from .005 to &lt;.001). Results were similar for both journals, with minor exceptions. Both hope and cure were used in a greater number of articles and sentences in the narrative and editorial categories than in primary research. Moreover, hope was used more often in narrative essays than in editorials. The relative reluctance to use these terms in more scientifically oriented original reports, despite concomitant improvements in oncologic outcomes, may reflect a bias worthy of future exploration.

Aromatase inhibitor–induced musculoskeletal symptoms (AIMSS) were first recognized as a distinct entity in 2001, 5 years after the approval of the first aromatase inhibitor, anastrozole. Musculoskeletal symptoms can severely affect patients’ quality of life and also lead to premature discontinuation of aromatase inhibitor therapy. Several interventions for managing AIMSS have been investigated in the last decade, with some demonstrating promise. This article provides an evidence-based summary to guide practicing oncologists in regard to the epidemiology, prevention, and treatment of AIMSS.

PURPOSE To update the ASCO guideline on the recommended prevention and treatment approaches in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in adult cancer survivors. METHODS An Expert Panel conducted targeted systematic literature reviews to identify new studies. RESULTS The search strategy identified 257 new references, which led to a full-text review of 87 manuscripts. A total of 3 systematic reviews, 2 with meta-analyses, and 28 primary trials for prevention of CIPN in addition to 14 primary trials related to treatment of established CIPN, are included in this update. RECOMMENDATIONS The identified data reconfirmed that no agents are recommended for the prevention of CIPN. The use of acetyl-l-carnitine for the prevention of CIPN in patients with cancer should be discouraged. Furthermore, clinicians should assess the appropriateness of dose delaying, dose reduction, substitutions, or stopping chemotherapy in patients who develop intolerable neuropathy and/or functional impairment. Duloxetine is the only agent that has appropriate evidence to support its use for patients with established painful CIPN. Nonetheless, the amount of benefit from duloxetine is limited. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines .

Contralateral axillary metastasis (CAM) in breast cancer is presently treated as a stage IV disease. We hypothesized that this disease pattern is a manifestation of direct aberrant lymphatic drainage and would behave more similar to advanced locoregional disease. This is a single-site, retrospective review of patients with biopsy-proven CAM from 2008–2017. Descriptive analysis was performed. Twenty-three patients met the inclusion criteria. The median disease-free interval from primary tumor treatment to diagnosis of CAM was 68 months (range, 36–155 months). This population had aggressive disease (74% local recurrences and 61% clinical evidence of cutaneous or underlying muscular invasion) and extensive locoregional therapy (70% radiated, 57% mastectomy, and 65% axillary lymph node dissection) before their presentation with CAM. Fifteen (65.2%) patients recurred after treatment of CAM; the median recurrence-free interval was 11 months (range, 5–23 months), and 12 (52.2%) patients developed distant metastases. The median distant metastasis-free survival was 14 months (range, 11–23 months), and the median overall survival was 31 months (range, 22–67.5 months). Development of CAM is associated with aggressive disease and extensive prior locoregional surgery and/or radiation. The short recurrence-free interval and high progression to additional stage IV disease suggest these patients behave similar to traditional stage IV patients with resected oligometastatic disease.