Loprinzi, Charles L.

Purpose Studies suggest eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), an omega-3 fatty acid, augments weight, appetite, and survival in cancer-associated wasting. This study determined whether an EPA supplement—administered alone or with megestrol acetate (MA)—was more effective than MA. Patients and Methods Four hundred twenty-one assessable patients with cancer-associated wasting were randomly assigned to an EPA supplement 1.09 g administered bid plus placebo; MA liquid suspension 600 mg/d plus an isocaloric, isonitrogenous supplement administered twice a day; or both. Eligible patients reported a 5-lb, 2-month weight loss and/or intake of less than 20 calories/kg/d. Results A smaller percentage taking the EPA supplement gained ≥ 10% of baseline weight compared with those taking MA: 6% v 18%, respectively (P = .004). Combination therapy resulted in weight gain of ≥ 10% in 11% of patients (P = .17 across all arms). The percentage of patients with appetite improvement (North Central Cancer Treatment Group Questionnaire) was not statistically different: 63%, 69%, and 66%, in EPA-, MA-, and combination-treated arms, respectively (P = .69). In contrast, 4-week Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy scores suggested MA-containing arms experienced superior appetite stimulation compared with the EPA arm, with scores of 40, 55, and 55 in EPA-, MA-, and combination-treated arms, respectively (P = .004). Survival was not significantly different among arms. Global quality of life was not significantly different among groups. With the exception of increased impotence in MA-treated patients, toxicity was comparable. Conclusion This EPA supplement, either alone or in combination with MA, does not improve weight or appetite better than MA alone.

Purpose Patients with incurable cancer are faced with difficult decisions regarding whether to take chemotherapy in an attempt to preserve the quality and/or prolong the quantity of their lives. The average prolongation in survival with chemotherapy compared with best supportive care has not been well described. Methods We performed a literature search using PUBMED combined with expert inquiry to identify trials comparing cytotoxic chemotherapy with best supportive care. Twenty-five randomized, controlled clinical trials comparing cytotoxic chemotherapy with best supportive care were identified. Sixteen trials (64%) were in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data were extracted and analyzed. Results Sufficient data for statistical modeling were available for NSCLC trials. The mean sample size of the NSCLC trials was 175 patients. Response rates in the treatment arms for NSCLC ranged from 7% to 42%. A relationship between response rate and survival was observed for NSCLC. The estimated relationship for NSCLC suggested that each 3.3% increase in response rate correlated, on average, with a 1-week increase in median survival, and each 2% increase in response rate correlated, on average, with a 1% increase in 1-year survival. The mean increase in 1-year survival for trials of agents with at least a 20% response rate in NSCLC was 16%. Formulas are provided to help estimate how a given response rate may effect median and 1-year survival relative to best supportive care alone for NSCLC. Conclusion We found a relationship between response rate and both median and 1-year survival in NSCLC. This information may help oncologists estimate how an NSCLC chemotherapy regimen with a given response rate can, on average, impact survival relative to supportive care alone.

Purpose Although it is well-established that fluorouracil- (FU-) based adjuvant therapy improves survival for patients with resected high-risk colon cancer, the magnitude of adjuvant therapy benefit across specific subgroups and for individual patients has been uncertain. Patients and Methods Using a pooled data set of 3,302 patients with stage II and III colon cancer from seven randomized trials comparing FU + leucovorin or FU + levamisole to surgery alone, we performed an analysis based on a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Treatment, age, sex, tumor location, T stage, nodal status, and grade were tested for both prognostic and predictive significance. Model derived estimates of 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) for surgery alone and surgery plus FU-based therapy were calculated for a range of patient subsets. Results Nodal status, T stage, and grade were the only prognostic factors independently significant for both disease-free survival and OS. Age was significant only for OS. In a multivariate analysis, adjuvant therapy showed a beneficial treatment effect across all subsets. Treatment benefits were consistent across sex, location, age, T-stage, and grade. A significant stage by treatment interaction was present, with treatment benefiting stage III patients to a greater degree than stage II patients. Conclusion Patients with high-risk resected colon cancer obtain benefit from FU-based therapy across subsets of age, sex, location, T stage, nodal status, and grade. Model estimates of survival stratified by T stage, nodal status, grade, and age are available at http://www.mayoclinic.com/calcs . This information may improve patients' and physicians' understanding of the potential benefits of adjuvant therapy.

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.