Loprinzi, Charles L.

LBA9006 Purpose: Many patients who receive EGFR inhibitors develop an acneiform rash, and anecdotal reports suggest tetracycline is effective in treating it. To our knowledge, however, no rigorous trials have ever been published to substantiate this approach. This double- blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to assess the role of tetracycline in preventing EGFR inhibitor-induced rash and/or reducing its severity. Methods: 61 patients were randomly assigned to tetracycline 500 mg orally twice a day×4 weeks versus an identical, similarly prescribed placebo. Eligibility criteria required all patients to have begun an EGFR inhibitor </= 7 days prior with no rash at study entry. Patients were to be followed for 8 weeks. Physician assessments of rash incidence, severity, and adverse events, occurred at 4 and 8 weeks. Patients completed a weekly rash diary, quality of life questionnaire (SKINDEX-16), and EGFR inhibitor compliance questionnaire. Thirty patients per group provides 90% power to detect a difference in rash incidence (the primary endpoint) of 40% between groups and of rejecting the null hypothesis of equal proportions with a type I error of 5% (2-sided). Results: Treatment arms were balanced on baseline characteristics, drop out rates, and rates of discontinuation of the EGFR inhibitor. Rash incidence was comparable across arms. Physicians reported that 16 tetracycline-treated patients (70%) and 22 placebo-exposed patients (76%) developed a rash (p=0.61). However, tetracycline appears to have lessened rash severity. By week 4, physician-reported grade 2 rash occurred in 17% of tetracycline-treated patients (n=4) and 55% of placebo- exposed patients (n=16); (p=0.04). Tetracycline-treated patients reported better scores on certain quality of life parameters (SKINDEX-16), such as skin burning or stinging, skin irritation, and being bothered by a persistence/recurrence of a skin condition. Adverse events were comparable across arms. Conclusion: Tetracycline did not prevent EGFR inhibitor-induced rashes. However, diminished rash severity and improved quality of life suggest this antibiotic merits further study. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

9021 Background: Physician-reported performance status (PS) is an important prognostic factor in advanced malignancies and is a commonly used stratification variable in cancer clinical trials. However, the extent, predictors, and prognostic importance of disagreement in PS assessment between physicians and patients have not been examined. Methods: Using NCCTG clinical trials from 1987–1990 (J Clin Oncol 19(15):3539–3546, 2001), we analyzed the difference and agreement of PS (ECOG and Karnofsky [KPS]) and nutritional status assessments reported by physicians and patients individually. The degree of disagreement was analyzed using paired t-test. Overall mortality was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. The effect of disagreement on overall survival was analyzed by Cox regression. Independent predictors of disagreement were identified by logistic regression. Results: 1,636 patients with advanced lung and colorectal cancer had a median survival of 9.8 months (95% CI, 9.4 to 10.4). Percent agreement between patients and physicians about KPS, ECOG PS, and appetite/nutritional status was 32.9%, 43.4% and 42.0% respectively. Physicians were more likely to rate patients better than individual patients were to rate themselves: ECOG (Mean 0.91 vs 1.30, p<.0001), KPS (Mean 83.3 vs. 81.7, p<0.0001), appetite/nutritional status (Mean 1.6 vs. 2.1, p<0.0001). Inability to work, depression and less than a high school education were independently associated with disagreement. An increased risk of death was observed for patient and physician disagreement on KPS (HR=1.15, 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.27 p=0.01) and appetite/nutritional status (HR=1.39, 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.54 p<0.0001). Conclusions: Patients and physicians frequently disagree about patient PS, with physicians tending to rate patients higher than patients do themselves. Baseline patient demographic factors that independently predict disagreement have been identified. Disagreement confers an increased risk of death in the setting of advanced malignancies. These findings illustrate limitations of physician-only assessed PS. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

9005 Background: Hot flashes can be a major problem in men with prostate cancer; effective non-hormonal options are needed. Methods: A four-arm, double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial was developed to evaluate gabapentin for hot flashes. Men with bothersome hot flashes (at least 14/week) related to androgen deprivation therapy were randomized to receive either a placebo or gabapentin doses of 300 mg qd, 300 mg bid or 300 mg tid; men were treated for 4 weeks. Hot flashes numbers and scores (hot flash number times mean severity) were measured using a validated daily hot flashes diary. A one-week baseline period preceded initiation of study tablets. The primary endpoint was the average intrapatient difference in hot flash score between baseline and treatment termination. With the planned sample size of 50 evaluable patients per arm, the study provided 80% power to detect a difference in change from baseline at 4 weeks between each gabapentin arm and the placebo arm of 1.3 hot flashes per day or 3.3 points in hot flash score. Results: 223 patients were randomized between 12/21/2001 and 11/10/2006. The study arms were well balanced. The following table illustrates the percentage of baseline hot flash scores and frequencies during the fourth treatment week, compared to the baseline week for 179 eligible patients, utilizing the data available at time of this abstract preparation. Patients receiving 900 mg/d dose of gabapentin also reported significantly less hot flash distress and more hot flash control satisfaction than did the placebo group. The gabapentin was remarkably well tolerated, without any statistically significantly worse patient-reported side effects on the gabapentin arms. Conclusion: Gabapentin at the 900 mg/d dose can reduce hot flashes, in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. No significant financial relationships to disclose. [Table: see text]

9001 Background: Fatigue is one of the most common symptoms in people diagnosed with cancer. Ginseng is a popular herb for treatment of this. It has been termed an “adaptogen”, felt to be able to restore balance to the body; its potential anti-fatigue efficacy is supported by animal data. The purpose of this pilot trial was to evaluate three doses of American Ginseng versus placebo for cancer-related fatigue. Methods: Patients with a life expectancy = 6 months and a history of cancer-related fatigue who had been experiencing fatigue = 1 month were eligible. Exclusion criteria included prior use of ginseng, chronic systemic steroids and brain malignancies. Other etiologies for fatigue, such as pain, were also excluded. Participants were randomized to receive, in a double blind manner, placebo, 750 mg/d, 1,000 mg/d or 2,000 mg/d of American Ginseng in BID dosing for 8 weeks. Endpoints included The Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), the Vitality Subscale of the SF-36 and several numeric analogue questions of perceived benefit; endpoints were measured at baseline, 4 weeks and 8 weeks. Area under the curve (AUC) and change from baseline were calculated. Results: Two hundred eighty two patients (69–72 per arm) were enrolled from 10/21/2005 to 07/05/2006. Available 8-week data are provided in the table below; higher numbers are better. There were no statistically significant differences in any grade of toxicity between active and placebo arms, and an equivalent number of patients discontinued the study due to adverse events in each arm. Conclusion: This randomized pilot trial provided data to suggest that American Ginseng doses of 1000–2000 mg/d may be effective for alleviating cancer related fatigue. Therefore, further study of American Ginseng in cancer survivors appears warranted. No significant financial relationships to disclose. [Table: see text]

576 Background: In node-negative, ER + breast cancer, gene expression profiling can identify level of risk and, in the case of ODX, may also identify pts with a higher chance of benefiting from adjuvant chemotherapy. Because the gene profile in ODX includes an assessment of ER, HER2, and proliferation, we hypothesized that clinicians using standardized criteria could discriminate risk (high versus low/intermediate) as specified by ODX. Methods: We identified Mayo Clinic patients with node-negative, ER + breast cancer, for whom ODX scores were available. Tumor slides were reviewed by an expert breast pathologist to confirm tumor size, histology, and tumor grade. Both ER and PR were quantitated; HER-2 was determined by IHC (FISH, if 2+). These clinical cases were presented to six academic oncologists, blinded to the ODX score, to predict ODX risk (low, intermediate, or high) and give their recommendation for chemotherapy (CTX) (yes/no). Afterwards, they were presented with the same cases with the actual ODX score, to give recommendations regarding CTX. Results: ODX scores in tumors from 31 patients were low in 18 pts, intermediate in 10 pts, and high in 3 pts. Concordance between predicted and actual ODX scores being low/intermediate vs high exceeded 87% for each oncologist. The most frequent discrepancies were actual low scores predicted as intermediate (31/80 discordant) and actual intermediate scores predicted as low (29/80 discordant). Overall agreement of predicted scores (high vs low/intermediate) among the oncologists was substantial (kappa=0.75, p<0.0001). CTX recommendations following provision of the ODX scores changed on average 18.2% (range 12.9%-25.8%) of the time, with slightly fewer changing for, versus against, a CTX recommendation. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the proper evaluation and interpretation of traditional prognostic criteria will identify most node negative, ER + patients at high risk of recurrence (as predicted by ODX) but poorly discriminate low versus intermediate risk. The provision of ODX data changed the recommendation for CTX in approximately 20% of cases. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

128 Background: Treatment for neoplastic fevers and sweating (NFS) is usually accomplished successfully with non-steroidal drugs (NSAIDs) such as naproxen, but such therapies may be contraindicated in some patients due to drug interactions, bleeding diathesis, renal disease, or cirrhosis. Options for treating NFS in such patients are limited. Methods: We report the first use of oxybutynin (OxyB), commonly used for hyperhidrosis and increasingly used for hormonally mediated hot flashes (Smith TJ, NEJM 2018; Leon-Ferre R, SABCS 2018, under review in JNCI Cancer Spectrum, for NFS in NSAID-ineligible or refractory patients. Results: Two patients with NFS were treated. The first was a 70 year old (yo) woman with cholangiocarcinoma with 3 months of NFS for whom naproxen was ineffective and who was starting chemotherapy. Within 2 hours after 2.5 mg OxyB q12h her sweating was gone, and her fever, which had been up to 100.4F, never resumed. The second was a 52 yo male with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma who was prescribed 2.5 mg q12h OxyB with lysis of his fever within hours and cessation of his sweating. To date, over one month has passed with no reduction in efficacy. Conclusions: OxyB may be a successful treatment modality for patients with NFS who cannot be treated with or are refractory to NSAIDs. Further research is warranted to ensure stability of results over time and to monitor for side effects.

Abstract Background Hot flashes (HFs) negatively affect quality of life among perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. This study investigated the efficacy of oxybutynin vs placebo in decreasing HFs. Methods In this randomized, multicenter, double-blind study, women with and without breast cancer with 28 or more HFs per week, lasting longer than 30 days, who were not candidates for estrogen-based therapy, were assigned to oral oxybutynin (2.5 mg twice a day or 5 mg twice a day) or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the intrapatient change from baseline in weekly HF score between each oxybutynin dose and placebo using a repeated-measures mixed model. Secondary endpoints included changes in weekly HF frequency, HF-related daily interference scale questionnaires, and self-reported symptoms. Results We enrolled 150 women. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Mean (SD) age was 57 (8.2) years. Two-thirds (65%) were taking tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. Patients on both oxybutynin doses reported greater reductions in the weekly HF score (5 mg twice a day: −16.9 [SD 15.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −10.6 [SD 7.7]), placebo −5.7 (SD 10.2); P &lt; .005 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), HF frequency (5 mg twice a day: −7.5 [SD 6.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −4.8 [SD 3.2], placebo: −2.6 [SD 4.3]; P &lt; .003 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), and improvement in most HF-related daily interference scale measures and in overall quality of life. Patients on both oxybutynin arms reported more side effects than patients on placebo, particularly dry mouth, difficulty urinating, and abdominal pain. Most side effects were grade 1 or 2. There were no differences in study discontinuation because of adverse effects. Conclusion Oxybutynin is an effective and relatively well-tolerated treatment option for women with HFs.

Abstract Background: Currently, low molecular weight heparin is the guideline endorsed treatment of patients with cancer associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). While apixaban is approved for the treatment of acute VTE, there are limited data supporting its use in cancer patients. Methods: Patients with cancer associated acute VTE were randomly assigned to receive either apixaban 10 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by 5 mg twice daily or subcutaneous dalteparin (200 IU/kg for 1 month followed by 150 IU/kg once daily) for 6 months. The primary outcome was major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included VTE recurrence and a composite of major plus clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Results: Of the 300 patients who underwent randomization, 287 were included in the primary analysis. Of these, metastatic disease was present in 65.5% of subjects and 74% were receiving concurrent systemic cancer therapy. Colorectal, lung, pancreas, and breast cancers were the four most prevalent cancer types. Major bleeding occurred in 0 of the 142 patients (0%) in the apixaban group as compared with 3 of the 145 patients (2.1%) in the dalteparin group (p=0.9956). Recurrent VTE occurred in 5 patients (3.4%) in the apixaban group and 20 patients (14.1%) in the dalteparin group (difference in risk -10.7 percentage points) with a Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.26, (95% CI, 0.09 - 0.80, p = 0.0182). Major plus clinically relevant non-major bleeding were similar at 9% for both groups. There were no mortality differences comparing apixaban (15.9%) and dalteparin (10.6%) groups at 6 months (HR 1.36, 95% CI 0.79 - 2.35). Monthly quality of life surveys favored apixaban therapy for many measures including: concern for excess bruising, stress, irritation, burden of delivery, and overall satisfaction with anticoagulant therapy (p<0.05). Monthly bruising questionnaire favored apixaban at each interval (p<0.002). Conclusions: Oral apixaban therapy was associated with very low rates of bleeding and significantly lower VTE recurrence with superior quality of life outcome measures compared to parenteral dalteparin in the treatment of cancer associated VTE. These data support the clinical utility of apixaban for the acute treatment of VTE in this patient population. Table. Table. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 630 Introduction: Erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) improve hemoglobin (Hb) levels and reduce red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirements in patients (pts) with chemotherapy-associated anemia (CAA), but many pts with CAA do not respond to ESAs. Functional iron deficiency due to inflammation-related hepcidin production and pathological sequestration of bioavailable iron may be an important reason for lack of ESA response in iron-replete pts. The common clinical practice of co-administering oral iron with ESAs does not appear to alter the disordered iron processing in CAA. We conducted a prospective trial to evaluate whether parenteral iron might overcome functional iron deficiency and benefit iron-replete pts with CAA undergoing ESA treatment. Patients and Methods: Eligible pts were receiving chemotherapy for a non-myeloid neoplasm and had Hb level <11.0 g/dL, ferritin >20 ng/mL, transferrin saturation <60%, and ECOG performance score ≤2. All pts received darbepoetin alfa (DA) 500 mcg subcutaneously q3wks until Hb reached >11 g/dL, and thereafter DA 300 mcg q3wks; DA was held for Hb >13 g/dL until Hb fell to <12 g/dL, then restarted with 25% dose reduction. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to receive either sodium ferric gluconate complex in sucrose (Ferrlecit) 187.5 mg intravenously q3wks (total dose 1,125 mg), oral ferrous sulfate 325 mg once daily, or oral placebo. Quality of life (QOL) was measured using the Symptom Distress Scale, Brief Fatigue Inventory, FACT-An, and LASA instruments. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving Hb ≥12.0 g/dL or ≥2.0 g/dL Hb increment from baseline by the end of the 16-week study. Secondary endpoints included transfusion requirements. changes in QOL, changes in iron parameters, and adverse events (AEs). Results: Planned enrollment was 582 pts, but the study met an early stopping rule due to an excess of serious AEs in the IV iron arm; 502 pts enrolled at 14 MCCRC sites between February 2006 and December 2008. The median age of the 490 evaluable pts was 64 years; 65% were female and 94% white; 6% had hematological neoplasms (lymphoma or multiple myeloma), 25% had severe anemia (Hb <9.5 g/dL), 48% received platinum-containing therapy, and 66% completed all 16 weeks of the study. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. With respect to the primary endpoint, 69.5% of IV iron-treated pts achieved a Hb response (median Hb increase from baseline to end of study, 2.7 g/dl), compared to 66.9% with oral iron (median increase, 2.4 g/dL) and 65.0% with placebo (median increase 2.3 g/dl) (p=0.73). There were no significant differences in the proportion of patients requiring RBC transfusion (12.8% for IV iron, 12.9% for oral iron, 13.5% for placebo; p=0.87) or QOL changes. A total of 17 pts (3%) died on study–8 in the IV iron arm, 6 oral iron, 3 placebo (p=0.22). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 54% of IV iron pts compared to 43% for oral iron and 45% placebo (p=0.03). The end-of-study ferritin level was higher in the IV iron arm (median 501 ng/mL) compared to the oral iron (229 ng/mL) and placebo (193 ng/mL) arms (p=0.0022). The median total DA dose administered was similar between arms (p=0.71). Conclusions: Co-administration of DA with intravenous ferrous gluconate q3wks did not result in improvement in Hb levels, reduce transfusions, improve QOL endpoints, or allow lower doses of DA, compared with DA + oral iron or DA + placebo. IV iron increased AEs. The reason for discordant results with 5 previous smaller studies is unclear. Disclosure: The study was supported by a grant from Amgen (Thousand Oaks, CA) to the MCCRC. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Ferrlecit, chemotherapy-associated anemia.