Citations

Abstract Sulindac, atorvastatin, or prebiotic dietary fiber may reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. However, clinical trial data are currently limited. We conducted a randomized, phase II chemoprevention trial involving subjects 40 years or older, with previously resected colon cancer or multiple/advanced colorectal adenomas. Magnification chromoendoscopy (MCE) was performed to identify and characterize rectal aberrant crypt foci (ACF); eligibility criteria required five or more rectal ACFs at baseline. Intervention assignments were as follows: (a) atorvastatin 20 mg qd; (b) sulindac 150 mg bid; (c) oligofructose-enriched inulin (as ORAFTI®Synergy1) 6 gm bid; or (d) control (maltodextrin) 6 gm bid, for 6 months. Percent change in rectal ACF number (%ΔACF) within arm was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included changes in proliferation (Ki67) and apoptosis (caspase-3), as measured from normal mucosa biopsy samples. Among 85 eligible randomized subjects, 76 (86%) completed the trial per protocol. The median (range) of rectal ACF was 9 (5–34) and 8 (0–37) at baseline and postintervention, respectively. The median (SD) for %ΔACF was 5.6 (−69% to 143%), −18.6 (−83% to 160%), −3.6 (−88% to 83%), and −10.0 (−100% to 117%) in the atorvastatin, sulindac, ORAFTI®Synergy1 and control arms, respectively. Neither within-arm (P = 0.12–0.59) nor between-arm (P = 0.30–0.92) comparisons of %ΔACF were statistically significant. The active and control interventions also seemed to have similar effects on mucosal proliferation and apoptosis (P > 0.05 for each comparison). Data from this multicenter, phase II trial do not provide convincing evidence of CRC risk reduction from 6-month interventions with atorvastatin, sulindac, or ORAFTI®Synergy1, although statistical power was limited by the relatively small sample size. Cancer Prev Res; 4(2); 259–69. ©2011 AACR.

Abstract Purpose: REOLYSIN (Oncolytics Biotech) consists of a wild-type oncolytic reovirus, which has selective cytotoxicity for tumor cells while sparing normal cells. In a phase I study as a single agent, repeated infusions of reovirus were safe with evidence of antitumor activity. Preclinical studies indicate potential for synergy between reovirus and chemotherapeutic agents. A multicenter, phase I dose escalation study was designed to assess the safety of combining reovirus with docetaxel chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancer. Experimental Design: Patients received 75 mg/m2 docetaxel (day 1) and escalating doses of reovirus up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 (days 1-5) every 3 weeks. Results: Twenty-five patients were enrolled, and 24 patients were exposed to treatment, with 23 completing at least one cycle and 16 suitable for response assessment. Dose-limiting toxicity of grade 4 neutropenia was seen in one patient, but the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Antitumor activity was seen with one complete response and three partial responses. A disease control rate (combined complete response, partial response, and stable disease) of 88% was observed. Immunohistochemical analysis of reovirus protein expression was observed in posttreatment tumor biopsies from three patients. Conclusion: The combination of reovirus and docetaxel is safe, with evidence of objective disease response, and warrants further evaluation in a phase II study at a recommended schedule of docetaxel (75 mg/m2, three times weekly) and reovirus (3 × 1010 TCID50, days 1-5, every 3 weeks). Clin Cancer Res; 16(22); 5564–72. ©2010 AACR.

Abstract Purpose: To determine the safety and feasibility of combining intratumoral reovirus and radiotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and to assess viral biodistribution, reoviral replication in tumors, and antiviral immune responses. Experimental Design: Patients with measurable disease amenable to palliative radiotherapy were enrolled. In the first stage, patients received radiotherapy (20 Gy in five fractions) plus two intratumoral injections of RT3D at doses between 1 × 108 and 1 × 1010 TCID50. In the second stage, the radiotherapy dose was increased (36 Gy in 12 fractions) and patients received two, four, or six doses of RT3D at 1 × 1010 TCID50. End points were safety, viral replication, immunogenicity, and antitumoral activity. Results: Twenty-three patients with various solid tumors were treated. Dose-limiting toxicity was not seen. The most common toxicities were grade 2 (or lower) pyrexia, influenza-like symptoms, vomiting, asymptomatic lymphopenia, and neutropenia. There was no exacerbation of the acute radiation reaction. Reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) studies of blood, urine, stool, and sputum were negative for viral shedding. In the low-dose (20 Gy in five fractions) radiation group, two of seven evaluable patients had a partial response and five had stable disease. In the high-dose (36 Gy in 12 fractions) radiation group, five of seven evaluable patients had partial response and two stable disease. Conclusions: The combination of intratumoral RT3D and radiotherapy was well tolerated. The favorable toxicity profile and lack of vector shedding means that this combination should be evaluated in newly diagnosed patients receiving radiotherapy with curative intent. Clin Cancer Res; 16(11); 3067–77. ©2010 AACR.

During deployment of National Guard or reserve troops to Iraq or Afghanistan, spouses on the home front have been largely invisible to our collective consciousness. A total of 18 spouses living in rural Wisconsin were interviewed to identify sources of stress and coping strategies. Stressors varied from predeployment through postdeployment, as did coping responses. During predeployment, spouses articulated that the primary stressor was their lives being “on hold.” During deployment, five stressors summarize the experience: worrying, waiting, going it alone, pulling double duty, and loneliness. Communication technology made it possible for most spouses to stay in touch using telephone, e-mail, or even Webcam. Keeping busy—managing personal, family, and household responsibilities—was the most commonly identified coping strategy. Postdeployment was a period of adjustment while couples searched for a new normal. Throughout all deployment phases, skilled and astute nurses can assist families toward health and healing.

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of pemetrexed combined with bevacizumab as second-line therapy for patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to correlate allelic variants in pemetrexed-metabolizing genes with clinical outcome. Patients and Methods Patients with previously treated NSCLC received pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 intravenous) combined with bevacizumab (15 mg/kg intravenous) every 3 weeks. The primary end point, evaluated using a one-stage Fleming design for detecting a true success rate of at least 70%, was the proportion of patients who were progression free and on treatment at 3 months. Polymorphisms in genes responsible for pemetrexed transport (reduced folate carrier [SLC19A1]) and metabolism (folylpolyglutamate synthase [FPGS] and gamma-glutamyl hydrolase [GGH]) evaluated in germline DNA (blood) were correlated with treatment outcome. Results Forty-eight evaluable patients (14 females and 34 males) received a median of four cycles (range, one to 20 cycles). The most common grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (13%), dyspnea (10%), and thrombosis (10%). Grade 3 or 4 hematologic AEs were neutropenia (19%) and lymphopenia (13%). Twenty-four (57%; 95% CI, 41% to 72%) of the first 42 patients met the success criteria. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) times were 8.6 and 4.0 months, respectively. The exon 6 (2522)C→T polymorphism in SLC19A1 correlated with 3-month progression-free status (P = .01) and with PFS (P = .05). The IVS1(1307)C→T polymorphism in GGH correlated with OS (P = .04). Conclusion The study did not meet its primary end point. However, the median PFS time of 4 months is promising. Pharmacogenetic studies in larger cohorts are needed to definitively identify polymorphisms that predict for survival and toxicity of pemetrexed.

Abstract Purpose: To determine the safety and feasibility of daily i.v. administration of wild-type oncolytic reovirus (type 3 Dearing) to patients with advanced cancer, assess viral excretion kinetics and antiviral immune responses, identify tumor localization and replication, and describe antitumor activity. Experimental Design: Patients received escalating doses of reovirus up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 for 5 consecutive days every 4 weeks. Viral excretion was assessed by reverse transcription-PCR and antibody response by cytotoxicity neutralization assay. Pretreatment and post-treatment tumor biopsies were obtained to measure viral uptake and replication. Results: Thirty-three patients received 76 courses of reovirus from 1 × 108 for 1 day up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 for 5 days, repeated every four weeks. Dose-limiting toxicity was not seen. Common grade 1 to 2 toxicities included fever, fatigue, and headache, which were dose and cycle independent. Viral excretion at day 15 was not detected by reverse transcription-PCR at 25 cycles and only in 5 patients at 35 cycles. Neutralizing antibodies were detected in all patients and peaked at 4 weeks. Viral localization and replication in tumor biopsies were confirmed in 3 patients. Antitumor activity was seen by radiologic and tumor marker (carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19.9, and prostate-specific antigen) evaluation. Conclusions: Oncolytic reovirus can be safely and repeatedly administered by i.v. injection at doses up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 for 5 days every 4 weeks without evidence of severe toxicities. Productive reoviral infection of metastatic tumor deposits was confirmed. Reovirus is a safe agent that warrants further evaluation in phase II studies.

Purpose To assess the tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and pharmacodynamics (PDs) of the mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) 1/2 inhibitor AZD6244 (ARRY-142886) in patients with advanced cancer. Patients and Methods In part A, patients received escalating doses to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD). In both parts, blood samples were collected to assess PK and PD parameters. In part B, patients were stratified by cancer type (melanoma v other) and randomly assigned to receive the MTD or 50% MTD. Biopsies were collected to determine inhibition of ERK phosphorylation, Ki-67 expression, and BRAF, KRAS, and NRAS mutations. Results Fifty-seven patients were enrolled. MTD in part A was 200 mg bid, but this dose was discontinued in part B because of toxicity. The 50% MTD (100 mg bid) was well tolerated. Rash was the most frequent and dose-limiting toxicity. Most other adverse events were grade 1 or 2. The PKs were less than dose proportional, with a median half-life of approximately 8 hours and inhibition of ERK phosphorylation in peripheral-blood mononuclear cells at all dose levels. Paired tumor biopsies demonstrated reduced ERK phosphorylation (geometric mean, 79%). Five of 20 patients demonstrated ≥ 50% inhibition of Ki-67 expression, and RAF or RAS mutations were detected in 10 of 26 assessable tumor samples. Nine patients had stable disease (SD) for ≥ 5 months, including two patients with SD for 19 (thyroid cancer) and 22 (uveal melanoma plus renal cancer) 28-day cycles. Conclusion AZD6244 was well tolerated with target inhibition demonstrated at the recommended phase II dose. PK analyses supported twice-daily dosing. Prolonged SD was seen in a variety of advanced cancers. Phase II studies are ongoing.

Abstract Purpose: To test combination treatment schedules of reovirus and radiation in human and murine tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. Experimental Design: In vitro cytotoxicity and cell cycle effects of reovirus given alone and combined with radiotherapy were assessed by colorimetric, tissue culture infectious dose 50, and fluorescence-activated cell sorting–based assays. Interactions between the agents were evaluated using combination index analysis. The effect of different schedules of reovirus and radiotherapy on viral replication and cytotoxicity was tested in vitro and the combination was assessed in three tumor models in vivo. Results: Characterization of reovirus cytotoxicity in a panel of cell lines yielded a range of sensitivities. Combined reovirus and radiotherapy yielded statistically significantly increased cytotoxicity, particularly in cell lines with moderate susceptibility to reovirus alone. The enhanced cytotoxicity of the combination occurred independently of treatment sequence or schedule. Radiation did not affect viral replication and only reduced reoviral cytotoxicity after clinically irrelevant single doses (>50 Gy). Combination index analysis revealed synergy between radiation (3-10 Gy) and reovirus at multiplicities of infection between 0.001 and 1. Combination treatment significantly increased apoptosis in tumor cells relative to either single-agent treatment. In vivo studies using xenograft and syngeneic tumors showed enhanced activity of the combination relative to reovirus or radiation alone (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Combining reovirus and radiotherapy synergistically enhances cytotoxicity in a variety of tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. These results offer strong support for translational clinical trials of reovirus plus radiotherapy that have been initiated in the clinic.