Citations

PURPOSE: Randomized studies have suggested that sucralfate is effective in mitigating diarrhea during pelvic radiation therapy (RT). This North Central Cancer Treatment Group study was undertaken to confirm the antidiarrheal effect of sucralfate. Several other measures of bowel function were also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients receiving pelvic RT to a minimum of 45 Gy at 1.7 to 2.1 Gy/d were eligible for the study. Patients were assigned randomly, in double-blind fashion, to receive sucralfate (1.5 g orally every 6 hours) or an identical looking placebo during pelvic RT. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients were randomly assigned and found assessable. Overall, there was no significant difference in patient characteristics between those receiving sucralfate and those receiving placebo. Moderate or worse diarrhea was observed in 53% of patients receiving sucralfate versus 41% of those receiving placebo. Compared with patients receiving placebo, more sucralfate-treated patients reported fecal incontinence (16% v 34%, respectively; P = .04) and need for protective clothing (8% v 23%, respectively; P = .04). The incidence and severity of nausea were worse among those taking sucralfate (P = .03). Analysis of patient-reported symptoms 10 to 12 months after RT showed a nonsignificant trend toward more problems in patients taking sucralfate than in those taking placebo (average, 2.3 v 1.9 problems, respectively; P = .34). CONCLUSION: Sucralfate did not decrease pelvic RT-related bowel toxicity by any of the end points measured and seems to have aggravated some gastrointestinal symptoms.

PURPOSE: Based on the success of hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) for multiple myeloma, HSCT is being used to treat patients with primary systemic amyloidosis (AL). This article addresses the extent to which eligibility to undergo HSCT is a favorable prognostic feature and explores prognostic factors within the subset of eligible patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Mayo Clinic amyloid database was queried for all patients with AL seen at the Mayo Clinic from 1983 through 1997 who would have been eligible for peripheral-blood stem-cell transplantation. Inclusion criteria included biopsy-proven amyloid, symptomatic disease, absence of a clinical diagnosis of multiple myeloma, age ≤ 70 years, cardiac interventricular septal thickness ≤ 15 mm, cardiac ejection fraction more than 55%, serum creatinine ≤ 2 mg/dL, and direct bilirubin ≤ 2.0 mg/dL. RESULTS: Median age was 56 years (range, 25 to 70) with 79 (34%) older than 60 years. One hundred patients had early cardiac involvement; 41, hepatic involvement; 167, renal involvement; and 39, nerve involvement. The 229 patients have had a median follow-up of 52 months, and 151 have died. The median survival was 42 months with 5- and 10-year survival rates of 36% and 15%, respectively. Important predictors of survival were size of M-component in 24-hour urine, number of involved organs, alkaline phosphatase, performance score, and weight loss. CONCLUSION: The same patients who are eligible for HSCT are a good-risk population who do relatively well with chemotherapy (median survival, 42 months), substantially better than the expected median survival of 18 months for all patients with AL. A randomized trial is needed to assess the true effect of HSCT.

PURPOSE: The goals of this study were to determine the maximum-tolerated dose and describe the toxicities of the combination of irinotecan and docetaxel administered every 3 weeks to patients with advanced malignancies and, also, to evaluate the effect of irinotecan on the disposition of docetaxel and describe preliminary evidence of antitumor activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighteen patients received 85 courses (median, two courses; range, one to 15 courses) of treatment with irinotecan, administered over 90 minutes by intravenous infusion, followed by docetaxel, administered over 60 minutes by intravenous infusion. Four escalating dose levels of irinotecan/docetaxel (160/50 mg/m2, 160/65 mg/m2, 200/65 mg/m2, and 200/75 mg/m2) were studied. Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of irinotecan on the disposition of docetaxel. RESULTS: The most common and dose-limiting toxicity was myelosuppression, which consisted of neutropenia that was severe (National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria [NCI CTC] grade 4) but brief (< 5 days) in 11 patients, with three episodes of febrile neutropenia. Nonhematologic toxicities of anorexia, nausea, and stomatitis were mild to moderate (NCI CTC grades 1 and 2), but there was one incidence each of both CTC grade 3 anorexia and nausea. All patients had total alopecia. Diarrhea was dose-dependent and severe in four patients who failed to take adequate antidiarrhea therapy. Five out of 16 assessable patients, one with cholangiocarcinoma, one with leiomyosarcoma, and three with non–small-cell lung cancer, achieved partial remissions. CONCLUSION: The combination of irinotecan and docetaxel causes significant reversible myelosuppression, which was dose limiting but led to no serious sequelae. There was no evidence of a clinically significant interaction using these two agents in this sequence. The combination showed antitumor activity at all the dose levels tested and should be further studied in a number of tumor types. The recommended phase II dose on this schedule is irinotecan 160 mg/m2 and docetaxel 65 mg/m2.

PURPOSE: Hot flashes represent a significant clinical problem for some breast cancer survivors. Safe, effective treatment is needed for this prominent clinical problem. Although it has been shown that estrogen or progesterone replacement therapy can alleviate this problem, there are continued safety concerns regarding the use of hormonal therapies in these women. Based on anecdotal information, we hypothesized that soy-derived phytoestrogens, weak estrogen-like substances in the soybean that demonstrate estrogen agonist and/or antagonist effects when they bind to estrogen receptors, could alleviate hot flashes. This current trial was designed to investigate this hypothesis.PATIENTS AND METHODS: This double-blind clinical trial involved breast cancer survivors with substantial hot flashes. After randomization, patients underwent a 1-week baseline period with no therapy. This was followed by 4 weeks of either soy tablets or placebo. The patients then crossed over to the opposite arm in a double-blind manner for the last 4 weeks. Patients completed a daily questionnaire documenting hot flash frequency, intensity, and perceived side effects.RESULTS: Of the 177 women who were randomized and started the study substance, 155 (88%) provided useable data over the first 5 weeks; 149 provided usable data over the entire 9 weeks. There was no suggestion that the soy product was more effective in reducing hot flashes than the placebo. At study completion, patients preferred the soy product 33% of the time, the placebo 37% of the time, and neither substance 31% of the time. No toxicity was observed.CONCLUSION: The soy product did not alleviate hot flashes in breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: We have completed a phase I study, followed by three phase I/II studies, in patients with metastatic melanoma, renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and sarcoma in order to evaluate the safety, toxicity, and antitumor activity of Leuvectin (Vical Inc, San Diego, CA), a gene transfer product containing a plasmid encoding human interleukin (IL)-2 formulated with the cationic lipid 1,2-dimyristyloxypropyl-3-dimethyl-hydroxyethyl ammonium bromide/dioleyl-phosphatidyl-ethanolamine (DMRIE/DOPE) and administered intratumorally. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients were treated in the phase I study. Leuvectin doses were 10 μg, 30 μg, or 300 μg weekly for 6 weeks. In three subsequent phase I/II studies, a total of 52 patients (18 with melanoma, 17 with RCC, and 17 with sarcoma) were treated with further escalating doses of Leuvectin: 300 μg twice a week for 3 weeks, 750 μg weekly for 6 weeks, and 1,500 μg weekly for 6 weeks. RESULTS: There were no drug-related grade 4 toxicities and only one grade 3 toxicity, but the majority ofpatients experienced mild constitutional symptoms after treatment. In the phase I/II studies, 45 patients were assessable for response (14 with RCC, 16 with melanoma, and 15 with sarcoma). Two patients with RCC and one with melanoma have achieved partial responses lasting from 16 to 19 months and continuing. In addition, two RCC, three melanoma, and six sarcoma patients had stable disease lasting from 3 to 18 months and continuing. The plasmid was detected by polymerase chain reaction assay in the posttreatment samples of 29 of 46 evaluated patients. Immunohistochemistry studies on serial biopsy specimens showed increased IL-2 expression and CD8+ infiltration after treatment in the tumor samples of several patients (12 and 16, respectively). CONCLUSION: Direct intratumoral injection of Leuvectin is a safe and possibly effective immunotherapeutic approach in the treatment of certain tumor types.

PURPOSE: A significant number of patients with stage T1 bladder carcinoma are at risk for cancer progression. We sought to identify factors associated with cancer progression in a series of patients with stage T1 bladder carcinoma treated with a contemporary therapeutic approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 83 consecutive patients in whom stage T1 bladder carcinoma was diagnosed at the Mayo Clinic between 1987 and 1992. All patients underwent transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB) and had histologic confirmation of the diagnosis. The mean age was 71 years (range, 47 to 94 years). The male-to-female ratio was 3.9:1. The mean length of follow-up was 5.2 years (range, 1 day to 10.4 years). The depth of lamina propria invasion in the TURB specimens was measured with an ocular micrometer. Cancer progression was defined as the development of muscle-invasive or more advanced stage carcinoma, distant metastasis, or death from bladder cancer. RESULTS: The overall 5- and 7-year progression-free survival rates were 82% and 80%, respectively. The depth of invasion in the TURB specimens was associated with cancer progression (hazards ratio, 1.6 for doubling of depth of invasion; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 2.4; P = .037). The 5-year progression-free survival rate for patients with depth of invasion of ≥ 1.5 mm was 67%, compared with 93% for those with depth of invasion of less than 1.5 mm (P = .009). No other variable, including age, sex, tobacco use, alcohol use, the presence of carcinoma-in-situ, histologic grade, lymphocytic infiltration, or muscularis mucosae invasion, was associated with cancer progression. CONCLUSION: The depth of invasion in the TURB specimens, measured with a micrometer, is predictive of cancer progression in patients with stage T1 bladder carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To determine the toxicity and response rate in children treated with dexamethasone, etoposide, cisplatin, high-dose cytarabine, and l-asparaginase (DECAL) for recurrent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) and Hodgkin’s disease (HD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-seven children with recurrent NHL (n = 68) or HD (n = 29) were enrolled. Treatment consisted of two cycles of DECAL, then bone marrow transplantation or up to four cycles of ifosfamide, mesna, and etoposide alternating with DECAL maintenance therapy. RESULTS: After two cycles of DECAL induction therapy, complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) was reported in 19 (65.5%; 10 CRs and nine PRs) of 29 patients with HD and 29 (41.6%; 23 CRs and six PRs) of 68 patients with NHL. When only 24 patients with HD and 58 patients with NHL who were assessable for response were considered, the response rates were 79.2% (19 of 24 patients) and 50.0% (29 of 58 patients), respectively. Five-year event-free survival was 26% ± 9% and 23% ± 5% in patients with HD and NHL, respectively. Five-year survival was 31% ± 14% and 30% ± 6%, respectively. Although median time to treatment failure was significantly longer in patients with HD (EFS, P = .002; survival, P = .011), this difference did not translate into a higher long-term survival. Grade 3 or 4 toxic effects were observed during induction in 70 (72%) of 97 patients and during maintenance in 45 (70%) of 64 courses of DECAL therapy. Pancytopenia and systemic infections in particular were frequently observed. Other toxic effects were uncommon. Although not a formal part of the therapy or the study design, 42 patients who responded to therapy who underwent bone marrow transplant did not show any benefit from this approach. CONCLUSION: DECAL is an effective and tolerable salvage regimen for treating patients with recurrent NHL and HD.

PURPOSE: We postulated that the pathologic evaluation of the lymph nodes of surgical specimens from patients with rectal cancer can have a substantial impact on time to relapse and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from 1,664 patients with T3, T4, or node-positive rectal cancer treated in a national intergroup trial of adjuvant therapy with chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Associations between the number of lymph nodes found by the pathologist in the surgical specimen and the time to relapse and survival outcomes were investigated. RESULTS: Patients were divided into groups by nodal status and the corresponding quartiles of numbers of nodes examined. The number of nodes examined was significantly associated with time to relapse and survival among patients who were node-negative. For the first through fourth quartiles, the 5-year relapse rates were 0.37, 0.34, 0.26, and 0.19 (P = .003), and the 5-year survival rates were 0.68, 0.73, 0.72, and 0.82 (P = .02). No significant differences were found by quartiles among patients determined to be node-positive. We propose that observed differences are primarily related to the incorrect determination of nodal status in node-negative patients. Approximately 14 nodes need to be studied to define nodal status accurately. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the pathologic assessment of lymph nodes in surgical specimens is often inaccurate and that examining greater number of nodes increases the likelihood of proper staging. Some patients who might benefit from adjuvant therapy are misclassified as node-negative due to incomplete sampling of lymph nodes.