Rowland, Kendrith M.

Background: Although 50% to 90% of patients who receive epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors develop a rash, options for rash prevention or palliation remain limited. This issue is particularly important from a palliative care standpoint because these agents are prescribed only to patients with incurable cancer. Here, we report (1) gene expression profiling of skin biopsies from patients with an EGFR inhibitor–induced rash and (2) a randomized, placebo-controlled feasibility trial with the antiandrogen, spironolactone. Both investigations were undertaken to begin to explore the hypothesis that androgens mediate EGFR inhibitor–induced rash and that antiandrogens palliate it. Methods/Results: First, 4 skin biopsies from patients with EGFR inhibitor–induced rash (3 men and 1 woman) were subject to gene expression microarray profiling. A public data set of normal skin gene expression (Gene Expression Omnibus, GSE22998) served as a reference. Sixty percent of commonly interrogated androgen receptor genes (207 of 308 between the 2 data sets) were differentially expressed ( P < .05) in the rash samples. Second, in a 17-patient double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial with topical spironolactone applied to the face, although the primary feasibility end point was not achieved, patients in the spironolactone arm received more doses of EGFR inhibitor, and anecdotal photographic evidence suggested salutatory effects of spironolactone on rash. Conclusions: Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor–induced rash appears to be androgen-mediated; antiandrogen therapy merits further study for rash prevention/palliation.

AbstractPatients with relapsed aggressive non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) are often treated with platinum‐based chemoimmunotherapy regimens in preparation for autologous stem cell transplant. We sought to reduce toxicity and maintain efficacy by using oxaliplatin with rituximab, cytarabine and dexamethasone (ROAD) in a phase II clinical trial in patients who had relapsed after one prior regimen. ROAD was delivered q21 days and consisted of rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV weekly x 4 doses (cycle 1 only); dexamethasone 40 mg PO/IV d2 – 5; oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 IV day 2; cytarabine 2000 mg/m2 IV × two doses on days 2 to 3; and pegfilgrastim 6 mg SC on day 4. Forty‐five eligible patients were accrued between 2006 and 2008. Patient characteristics were a median age of 69 years; 96% had received prior rituximab; 53% were within one year of diagnosis. The median number of cycles received was 2 (range, 1‐6). Forty‐four % received ROAD as an outpatient. The overall response rate was 71% with 27% (12/45) CR and 44% (20/45) PR. Forty‐four % (20/45) of all patients and 69% (18/26) of patients whom responded after 2 cycles proceeded to transplant. Median overall survival was 26 mos (95% CI: 7.3 mos—not reached) and median progression‐free survival was 11 mos (95% CI: 6—104 mos). There was no grade 3/4 nephrotoxicity; the rate of grade 3/4 neuropathy was 4%. Forty‐two percent of all patients and 69% of patients transplanted remain alive at 5 years. ROAD represents an acceptable salvage therapeutic option for patients with relapsed aggressive NHL.

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.

PURPOSE: Previous double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that both corticosteroids and progestational agents do partially alleviate cancer anorexia/cachexia. Pilot information suggested that an anabolic corticosteroid might also improve appetites in patients with cancer anorexia/cachexia. The current trial was developed to compare and contrast a progestational agent, a corticosteroid, and an anabolic corticosteroid for the treatment of cancer anorexia/cachexia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients suffering from cancer anorexia/cachexia were randomized to receive either dexamethasone 0.75 mg qid, megestrol acetate 800 mg orally every day, or fluoxymesterone 10 mg orally bid. Patients were observed at monthly intervals to evaluate weight changes and drug toxicity. Patients also completed questionnaires at baseline and at monthly intervals to evaluate appetites and drug toxicities. RESULTS: Fluoxymesterone resulted in significantly less appetite enhancement and did not have a favorable toxicity profile. Megestrol acetate and dexamethasone caused a similar degree of appetite enhancement and similar changes in nonfluid weight status, with nonsignificant trends favoring megestrol acetate for both of these parameters. Dexamethasone was observed to have more corticosteroid-type toxicity and a higher rate of drug discontinuation because of toxicity and/or patient refusal than megestrol acetate (36% v 25%; P = .03). Megestrol acetate had a higher rate of deep venous thrombosis than dexamethasone (5% v 1%; P = .06). CONCLUSION: Whereas fluoxymesterone clearly seems to be an inferior choice for treating cancer anorexia/cachexia, megestrol acetate and dexamethasone have similar appetite stimulating efficacy but differing toxicity profiles.