Sucralfate in the Prevention of Treatment-Induced Diarrhea in Patients Receiving Pelvic Radiation Therapy: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Phase III Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial
PURPOSE: Randomized studies have suggested that sucralfate is effective in mitigating diarrhea during pelvic radiation therapy (RT). This North Central Cancer Treatment Group study was undertaken to confirm the antidiarrheal effect of sucralfate. Several other measures of bowel function were also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients receiving pelvic RT to a minimum of 45 Gy at 1.7 to 2.1 Gy/d were eligible for the study. Patients were assigned randomly, in double-blind fashion, to receive sucralfate (1.5 g orally every 6 hours) or an identical looking placebo during pelvic RT. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients were randomly assigned and found assessable. Overall, there was no significant difference in patient characteristics between those receiving sucralfate and those receiving placebo. Moderate or worse diarrhea was observed in 53% of patients receiving sucralfate versus 41% of those receiving placebo. Compared with patients receiving placebo, more sucralfate-treated patients reported fecal incontinence (16% v 34%, respectively; P = .04) and need for protective clothing (8% v 23%, respectively; P = .04). The incidence and severity of nausea were worse among those taking sucralfate (P = .03). Analysis of patient-reported symptoms 10 to 12 months after RT showed a nonsignificant trend toward more problems in patients taking sucralfate than in those taking placebo (average, 2.3 v 1.9 problems, respectively; P = .34). CONCLUSION: Sucralfate did not decrease pelvic RT-related bowel toxicity by any of the end points measured and seems to have aggravated some gastrointestinal symptoms.
Phase III Clinical Trial of the Combination of Cisplatin, Dacarbazine, and Carmustine With or Without Tamoxifen in Patients With Advanced Malignant Melanoma
PURPOSE: A prospective randomized phase III clinical trial was conducted to assess whether the addition of tamoxifen (TAM) to the three-agent regimen of cisplatin (CDDP), dacarbazine (DTIC), and carmustine (BCNU) significantly increased the progression-free survival and overall survival of patients with advanced malignant melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced malignant melanoma were treated with CDDP + DTIC + BCNU (CDB) with or without TAM. The dose schedule was CDDP 25 mg/m2 given intravenously (IV) for 30 to 45 minutes in 500 mL of dextrose and ½ normal saline (NS) on days 1 to 3 of a 3-week cycle; DTIC 220 mg/m2 IV for 1 hour in 500 mL of dextrose and ½ NaCl on days 1 to 3 of a 3-week cycle; BCNU 150 mg/m2 IV for 2 to 3 hours in 750 to1,000 mL of dextrose and 5% water onday 1 of every odd 3-week cycle; and TAM 20 mg taken orally every morning. RESULTS: There were 184 eligible patients enrolled. These patients were observed until death or for a minimum of 1.3 years. At last contact, 12 were still alive. The median time to progression was 3.4 months on the CDB arm and 3.1 months on the CDB + TAM arm. The median survival time was 6.8 months with CDB and 6.9 months with CDB + TAM. Progression-free survival (P = .429) and overall survival (P = .545) were not found to differ by treatment. CONCLUSION: The addition of TAM to this three-agent regimen of CDB was not found to provide a meaningful clinical advantage in the treatment of patients with advanced malignant melanoma.
Phase III Trial of Carmustine and Cisplatin Compared With Carmustine Alone and Standard Radiation Therapy or Accelerated Radiation Therapy in Patients With Glioblastoma Multiforme: North Central Cancer Treatment Group 93-72-52 and Southwest Oncology Group
Purpose In patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme, to determine whether cisplatin plus carmustine (BCNU) administered before and concurrently with radiation therapy (RT) improves survival compared with BCNU and RT and whether survival using accelerated RT (ART) is equivalent to survival using standard RT (SRT). Patients and Methods After surgery, patients were stratified by age, performance score, extent of surgical resection, and histology (glioblastoma v gliosarcoma) and then randomly assigned to arm A (BCNU plus SRT), arm B (BCNU plus ART), arm C (cisplatin plus BCNU plus SRT), or arm D (cisplatin plus BCNU plus ART). Results Four hundred fifty-one patients were randomly assigned, and 401 were eligible. Frequent toxicities included myelosuppression, vomiting, sensory neuropathy, and ototoxicity and were worse with cisplatin. There was no difference in toxicity between SRT and ART. Median survival times and 2-year survival rates for patients who received BCNU plus RT (arms A and B) compared with cisplatin, BCNU, and RT (arms C and D) were 10.1 v 11.5 months, respectively, and 11.5% v 13.7%, respectively (P = .19). Median survival times and 2-year survival rates for patients who received SRT (arms A and C) compared with ART (arms B and D) were 11.2 v 10.5 months, respectively, and 13.8% v 11.4%, respectively (P = .33). Conclusion Cisplatin administered concurrently with BCNU and RT resulted in more toxicity but provided no significant improvement in survival. SRT and ART produced similar toxicity and survival.
Prognostic Value of Proliferation, Apoptosis, Defective DNA Mismatch Repair, and p53 Overexpression in Patients With Resected Dukes' B2 or C Colon Cancer
Purpose Molecular studies of colon cancer have provided insights into pathogenesis, yet it is unclear how important these markers are in predicting prognosis. This study investigated the prognostic significance of TUNEL, bcl-2, p53, proliferation marker Ki-67 and DNA mismatch repair (MMR) status in patients with Dukes' stage B2 and C colorectal adenocarcinomas. Patients and Methods Tumor tissue from 366 patients (75% Dukes' C, 25% Dukes' B2) from four randomized North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase III surgical adjuvant trials were used. Eighty-one percent of patients received adjuvant treatment, which was primarily fluorouracil (FU) based (90%). Tumor location was predominantly (87%) the colon. Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated dUTP nick-end labeling (TUNEL), Ki-67, p53, bcl-2, and MMR were assayed using immunohistochemistry. Stage, grade, MMR, Ki-67, and previously determined flow cytometry markers (ploidy and S phase) were explored for associations with each other and with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Results Univariately, stage B2, low grade, diploid, Ki-67 more than 27%, normal p53, and FU-based adjuvant treatment were significantly associated with improved OS and DFS (P < .05). After adjusting for stage, grade, and ploidy in multivariate analysis, Ki-67 remained significantly related to both OS and DFS (P < .01). Active FU-based adjuvant treatment was significant only for OS in this multivariate model. Neither bcl-2 nor TUNEL were significant. Conclusion This retrospective study indicates that Ki-67 and ploidy may have stronger prognostic impact on OS and DFS than other parameters investigated after adjusting for stage and tumor grade. Prospective studies to elucidate the mechanism and prognostic significance of these findings are necessary.
Nicotine Patch Therapy Based on Smoking Rate Followed by Bupropion for Prevention of Relapse to Smoking
Purpose: To determine whether (1) tailored nicotine patch therapy that is based on smoking rate can be carried out in a multisite oncology investigative group practice setting, (2) long-term use of bupropion reduces the rate of relapse to smoking in smokers who stop smoking with nicotine patch therapy, and (3) bupropion can initiate smoking abstinence among smokers who have failed to stop smoking after nicotine patch therapy. Participants and Methods: Fourteen North Central Cancer Treatment Group sites recruited generally healthy adult smokers from the general population for nicotine patch therapy and based the patch dosage on smoking rates. At completion of nicotine patch therapy, nonsmoking participants were eligible to be assigned to bupropion or placebo for 6 months (for relapse prevention). and smoking participants were eligible to be assigned to bupropion or placebo for 8 weeks of treatment. Results: Of 578 subjects, 31% were abstinent from smoking at the end of nicotine patch therapy. Of those subjects not smoking at the end of nicotine patch therapy who entered the relapse prevention phase, 28% and 25% were not smoking at 6 months (the end of the medication phase) for bupropion and placebo, respectively (P = .73). For those still smoking at the end of nicotine patch therapy, 3.1% and 0.0% stopped smoking with bupropion or placebo, respectively (P = .12). Conclusion: Tailored nicotine patch therapy for the general population of smokers can be provided in a multisite oncology investigative group setting. Bupropion did not reduce relapse to smoking in smokers who stopped smoking with nicotine patch therapy. Bupropion did not initiate abstinence among smokers who failed to stop smoking with nicotine patch therapy.