Loprinzi, Charles L.

Purpose The characteristics and natural history of the paclitaxel–acute pain syndrome (P-APS) and paclitaxel's more chronic neuropathy have not been well delineated. Methods Patients receiving weekly paclitaxel (70 to 90 mg/m 2 ) completed daily questionnaires and weekly European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN) –20 instruments during the entire course of therapy. Results P-APS symptoms peaked 3 days after chemotherapy. Twenty percent of patients had pain scores of 5 to 10 of 10 with the first dose of paclitaxel. Sensory neuropathy symptoms were more prominent than were motor or autonomic neuropathy symptoms. Of the sensory neuropathy symptoms, numbness and tingling were more prominent than was shooting or burning pain. Patients with higher P-APS pain scores with the first dose of paclitaxel appeared to have more chronic neuropathy. Conclusion These data support that the P-APS is related to nerve pathology as opposed to being arthralgias and/or myalgias. Numbness and tingling are more prominent chronic neuropathic symptoms than is shooting or burning pain.

Abstract Background: Postmenopausal women with significant osteopenia/osteoporosis are at increased risk of fracture, a risk that is exacerbated by the use of Aromatase Inhibitors (AIs). Bisphosphonates may be used for these patients because there is no known interaction with estrogen and/or progesterone receptors (ER, PR). This study evaluated the concurrent use of zoledronic acid in patients with significant osteopenia or osteoporosis who received initial adjuvant letrozole therapy for primary BC, to determine if further bone mineral density (BMD) loss could be prevented.Methods: Postmenopausal women with Stage I-IIIa, ER and/or PR + BC, no evidence of metastatic disease, and a BMD T-score < -2.0 were treated with daily letrozole 2.5 mg/d, vitamin D 400 international units/d, calcium 500 mg twice daily, and 4 mg I.V. zoledronic acid every 6 months (for 5 years). The BMD was measured at baseline and at one year. Kruskall-Wallis p-value methodology was used as the method of statistical analysis. Since this was a single-arm study, the analysis plan was primarily descriptive. The primary endpoint was the mean change in lumbar spine (LS) BMD at 1 year.Results: 60 patients were enrolled; 46 completed 1 year of treatment. Mean patient age was 67 years, with 44% having taken prior tamoxifen. At 1 year (see figure 1), LS BMD increased 2.66% (p=0.01), femoral neck (FN) BMD increased 4.81% (p=0.01), and any measured endpoint (within the LS or FN) increased 4.55% (p=0.0052). 7% of patients experienced a fracture vs.13% with a pre-existing history of fracture before enrollment. No patients had disease recurrence during year 1. Toxicity was minimal with arthralgia as the most common complaint. There were no reports of osteonecrosis of the jaw.Conclusion: Zoledronic acid prevents additional bone loss in postmenopausal women with significant osteopenia or osteoporosis initiating letrozole. Treatment with zoledronic acid was associated with an improvement in BMD. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 2103.

Purpose Cumulative sensory neurotoxicity (sNT) is the dose-limiting toxicity of oxaliplatin, which commonly leads to early discontinuation of oxaliplatin-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant settings. In a nonrandomized, retrospective study, intravenous (IV) calcium/magnesium (Ca/Mg) was associated with reduced oxaliplatin-induced sNT. Methods Patients with colon cancer undergoing adjuvant therapy with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) were randomly assigned to Ca/Mg (1g calcium gluconate plus 1g magnesium sulfate pre- and post-oxaliplatin) or placebo, in a double-blinded manner. The primary end point was the percentage of patients with grade 2 or greater sNT at any time during or after oxaliplatin-based therapy by National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE; version 3) criteria. An oxaliplatin-specific sNT scale and patient questionnaires were also used to assess sNT. After 104 of 300 planned patients were enrolled, the study was closed. This was due to preliminary reports from another trial that suggested that Ca/Mg decreased treatment efficacy; these data were subsequently found to be incorrect. Results Overall, 102 patients were available for analysis. Ca/Mg decreased the incidence of chronic, cumulative, grade 2 or greater sNT, as measured by NCI CTCAE (P = .038) and also by the oxaliplatin-specific sNT scale (P = .018). In addition, acute muscle spasms associated with oxaliplatin were significantly reduced (P = .01) No effect on acute, cold-induced sNT was found. No substantial differences in adverse effects were noted between Ca/Mg and placebo. Conclusion Despite early termination and decreased statistical power, this study supports IV Ca/Mg as an effective neuroprotectant against oxaliplatin-induced cumulative sNT in adjuvant colon cancer.

Purpose Functional iron deficiency may impair response to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in iron-replete patients with chemotherapy-associated anemia (CAA). This study evaluated whether coadministration of parenteral iron improves ESA efficacy in patients with CAA. Patients and Methods This prospective, multicenter, randomized trial enrolled 502 patients with hemoglobin (Hb) less than 11 g/dL who were undergoing chemotherapy for nonmyeloid malignancies. All patients received darbepoetin alfa once every 3 weeks and were randomly assigned to receive either ferric gluconate 187.5 mg intravenously (IV) every 3 weeks, oral daily ferrous sulfate 325 mg, or oral placebo for 16 weeks. Results There was no difference in the erythropoietic response rate (ie, proportion of patients achieving Hb ≥12 g/dL or Hb increase ≥ 2 g/dL from baseline): 69.5% (95% CI, 61.9% to 76.5%) of IV iron-treated patients achieved an erythropoietic response compared with 66.9% (95% CI, 59.1% to 74.0%) who received oral iron and 65.0% (95% CI, 57.2% to 72.3%) who received oral placebo (P = .75). There were also no differences in the proportion of patients requiring red cell transfusions, changes in quality of life, or the dose of darbepoetin administered. Adverse events (AEs) tended to be more common in the IV iron arm: grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 54% (95% CI, 46% to 61%) of patients receiving IV iron compared with 44% (95% CI, 36% to 52%) who received oral iron and 46% (95% CI, 38% to 54%) who received oral placebo (P = .16). Conclusion In patients with CAA, addition of IV ferric gluconate to darbepoetin failed to provide additional benefit compared with oral iron or oral placebo.

Purpose Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting toxicity of capecitabine for which no effective preventative treatment has been definitively demonstrated. This trial was conducted on the basis of preliminary data that a urea/lactic acid–based topical keratolytic agent (ULABTKA) may prevent HFS. Patients and Methods A randomized, double-blind phase III trial evaluated 137 patients receiving their first ever cycle of capecitabine at a dose of either 2,000 or 2,500 mg/m2 per day for 14 days. Patients were randomly assigned to a ULABTKA versus a placebo cream, which was applied to the hands and feet twice per day for 21 days after the start of capecitabine. Patients completed an HFS diary (HFSD) daily. HFS toxicity grade (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] v3.0) was also collected at baseline and at the end of each cycle. The primary end point was the incidence of moderate/severe HFS symptoms in the first treatment cycle, based on the patient-reported HFSD. Results The percentage of patients with moderate/severe HFS symptoms was not different between groups, being 13.6% in the ULABTKA arm and 10.2% in the placebo arm (P = .768 by Fisher's exact test). The odds ratio was 1.37 (95% CI, 0.37 to 5.76). Cycle 1 CTCAE skin toxicity was higher in the ULABTKA arm but not significantly so (33% v 27%; P = .82). No significant differences were observed in other toxicities between groups. Conclusion These data do not support the efficacy of a ULABTKA cream for preventing HFS symptoms in patients receiving capecitabine.

Purpose Nonhormonal pharmacologic interventions are recommended for the treatment of hot flashes in breast cancer survivors. Antidepressants and gabapentin have been shown to be both effective and well tolerated; however, it is not clear which is preferred. Patients and Methods This was a group-sequential, open-label, randomized, cross-over trial of 4 weeks of venlafaxine (37.5 mg daily for 7 days followed by 75 mg daily for 21 days) versus gabapentin (300 mg once per day for 3 days, then 300 mg twice per day for 3 days, then 300 mg three times per day for 22 days), with patient preference as the primary outcome. Postmenopausal women with at least 14 bothersome hot flashes per week for the prior month were eligible. A 2-week baseline period and a 2-week tapering/washout time was used before the first and second treatment periods, respectively. Diaries were used to measure hot flashes and potential toxicities throughout the study. Participants completed a preference questionnaire at the end of the study. A predefined Pocock stopping rule was applied. Patient preference and hot flash and toxicity outcomes were compared between treatments. Results Sixty-six patients were randomly assigned, 56 of whom provided a preference (eight dropped out and two had no preference); 18 (32%) preferred gabapentin and 38 (68%) preferred venlafaxine (P = .01). Both agents reduced hot flash scores to a similar extent (66% reduction). Venlafaxine was associated with increased nausea, appetite loss, constipation, and reduced negative mood changes compared with gabapentin, whereas gabapentin was associated with increased dizziness and appetite compared with venlafaxine (all P < .05). Conclusion Breast cancer survivors prefer venlafaxine over gabapentin for treating hot flashes.

Abstract Purpose. Rash occurs in &gt;50% of patients prescribed epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors. This study was undertaken to determine whether sunscreen prevents or mitigates these rashes. Methods. This placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial enrolled rash-free patients starting an EGFR inhibitor. Patients were randomly assigned to sunscreen with a sun protection factor of 60 applied twice a day for 28 days versus placebo. They were then monitored for rash and quality of life (Skindex-16) during the 4-week intervention and for an additional 4 weeks. Results. Fifty-four patients received sunscreen, and 56 received placebo; the arms were balanced at baseline. During the 4-week intervention, physician-reported rash occurred in 38 (78%) and 39 (80%) sunscreen-treated and placebo-exposed patients, respectively (p = 1.00); no significant differences in rash rates emerged over the additional 4 weeks. There were no significant differences in rash severity, and patient-reported outcomes of rash yielded similar conclusions. Adjustment for sun intensity by geographical zone, season, and use of photosensitivity medications did not yield a significant difference in rash across study arms (p = .20). Quality of life scores declined but remained comparable between arms. Conclusions. Sunscreen, as prescribed in this trial, did not prevent or attenuate EGFR inhibitor–induced rash.

PurposeFatigue is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. This trial was developed to evaluate the efficacy of long-acting methylphenidate for improving cancer-related fatigue and to assess its toxicities.Patients and MethodsAdults with cancer were randomly assigned in a double-blinded manner to receive methylphenidate (target dose, 54 mg/d) or placebo for 4 weeks. The Brief Fatigue Inventory was the primary outcome measure, while secondary outcome measures included a Symptom Experience Diary (SED), the Short Form-36 (SF-36) Vitality Subscale, a linear analog self-assessment, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and the Subject Global Impression of Change.ResultsIn total, 148 patients were enrolled. Using an area under the serum concentration-time curve analysis, there was no evidence that methylphenidate, as compared with placebo, improved the primary end point of cancer-related fatigue in this patient population (P = .35). Comparisons of secondary end points, including clinically significant changes in quality-of-life variables and cancer-related fatigue change from baseline, were similarly negative. However, a subset analysis suggested that patients with more severe fatigue and/or with more advanced disease did have some fatigue improvement with methylphenidate (eg, in patients with stage III or IV disease, the mean improvement in usual fatigue was 19.7 with methylphenidate v 2.1 with placebo; P = .02). There was a significant difference in self-reported toxicities (SED), with increased levels of nervousness and appetite loss in the methylphenidate arm.ConclusionThis clinical trial was unable to support the primary prestudy hypothesis that the chosen long-acting methylphenidate product would decrease cancer-related fatigue.