Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 15 de 15
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Support Care Cancer ; 25(11): 3407-3416, 2017 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28551844

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Paclitaxel is associated with both an acute pain syndrome (P-APS) and chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Given that extensive animal data suggest that minocycline may prevent chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity, the purpose of this pilot study was to investigate the efficacy of minocycline for the prevention of CIPN and the P-APS. METHODS: Patients with breast cancer were enrolled prior to initiating neoadjuvant or adjuvant weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks and were randomized to receive minocycline 200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg twice daily or a matching placebo. Patients completed (1) an acute pain syndrome questionnaire daily during chemotherapy to measure P-APS and (2) the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 questionnaire at baseline, prior to each dose of paclitaxel, and monthly for 6 months post treatment, to measure CIPN. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were randomized. There were no remarkable differences noted between the minocycline and placebo groups for the overall sensory neuropathy score of the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 or its individual components, which evaluate tingling, numbness and shooting/burning pain in hands and feet. However, patients taking minocycline had a significant reduction in the daily average pain score attributed to P-APS (p = 0.02). Not only were no increased toxicities reported with minocycline, but there was a significant reduction in fatigue (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this pilot study do not support the use of minocycline to prevent CIPN, but suggest that it may reduce P-APS and decrease fatigue; further study of the impact of this agent on those endpoints may be warranted.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Minociclina/uso terapêutico , Paclitaxel/efeitos adversos , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/induzido quimicamente , Antibacterianos/farmacologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Minociclina/farmacologia , Projetos Piloto
2.
Ann Neurol ; 76(5): 727-37, 2014 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25164601

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Mutations in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) genes are the cause of rare familial forms of polyneuropathy. Whether allelic variability in CMT genes is also associated with common forms of polyneuropathy-considered "acquired" in medical parlance-is unknown. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) occurs commonly in cancer patients and is individually unpredictable. We used CIPN as a clinical model to investigate the association of non-CMT polyneuropathy with CMT genes. METHODS: A total of 269 neurologically asymptomatic cancer patients were enrolled in the clinical trial Alliance N08C1 to receive the neurotoxic drug paclitaxel, while undergoing prospective assessments for polyneuropathy. Forty-nine CMT genes were analyzed by targeted massively parallel sequencing of genomic DNA from patient blood. RESULTS: A total of 119 (of 269) patients were identified from the 2 ends of the polyneuropathy phenotype distribution: patients that were most and least susceptible to paclitaxel polyneuropathy. The CMT gene PRX was found to be deleteriously mutated in patients who were susceptible to CIPN but not in controls (p = 8 × 10(-3)). Genetic variation in another CMT gene, ARHGEF10, was highly significantly associated with CIPN (p = 5 × 10(-4)). Three nonsynonymous recurrent single nucleotide variants contributed to the ARHGEF10 signal: rs9657362, rs2294039, and rs17683288. Of these, rs9657362 had the strongest effect (odds ratio = 4.8, p = 4 × 10(-4)). INTERPRETATION: The results reveal an association of CMT gene allelic variability with susceptibility to CIPN. The findings raise the possibility that other acquired polyneuropathies may also be codetermined by genetic etiological factors, of which some may be related to genes already known to cause the phenotypically related Mendelian disorders of CMT.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Doença de Charcot-Marie-Tooth/genética , Polineuropatias/induzido quimicamente , Polineuropatias/genética , Alelos , Antineoplásicos Fitogênicos/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mutação/genética , Neoplasias/complicações , Paclitaxel/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Troca de Nucleotídeo Guanina Rho/genética
3.
J Clin Oncol ; : JCO2301100, 2024 May 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38709986

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To test efficacy of donepezil, a cognitive enhancer, to improve memory in breast cancer survivors who report cancer-related cognitive impairment 1-5 years postchemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult female BCS exposed to ≥4 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy 1-5 years before enrollment who reported cancer-related cognitive impairment were eligible. Participants, enrolled at sites affiliated with the Wake Forest NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Research Base, were randomly assigned to receive 5 mg of donepezil once daily for 6 weeks titrated to 10 mg once daily for 18 weeks or placebo. Cognition and self-report cognitive functioning was assessed at baseline, 12, 24 (end of intervention), and 36 (washout) weeks postrandomization. Mixed-effects repeated measures analysis of covariance models were used to assess treatment differences in immediate recall (primary outcome) on the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) and other cognitive domains (secondary outcomes) with covariates of treatment, time, time by treatment interaction, baseline outcome level, age stratification, and an unstructured covariance matrix to account for within participant correlation over time. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-six BCS from 87 NCORP practices (mean age, 57.1, standard deviation [SD], 10.5) who were at a mean of 29.6 months (SD, 14.2) postchemotherapy were randomly assigned to donepezil (n = 140) or placebo (n = 136). At 24 weeks, treatment groups did not differ on HVLT-R scores (donepezil mean = 25.98, placebo = 26.50, P = .32). There were no statistically significant differences between treatments at 12, 24, or 36 weeks for attention, executive function, verbal fluency, processing speed, or self-reported cognitive functioning. Endocrine therapy and menopausal status did not affect results. CONCLUSION: BCS 1-5 years after completing chemotherapy with documented memory problems, randomly assigned to 24 weeks of 5-10 mg of donepezil once daily, did not perform differently at the end of treatment on tests of memory, other cognitive functions, or subjective functioning than those randomly assigned to placebo.

4.
JAMA ; 309(13): 1359-67, 2013 Apr 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23549581

RESUMO

IMPORTANCE: There are no known effective treatments for painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of duloxetine, 60 mg daily, on average pain severity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial at 8 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-funded cooperative research networks that enrolled 231 patients who were 25 years or older being treated at community and academic settings between April 2008 and March 2011. Study follow-up was completed July 2012. Stratified by chemotherapeutic drug and comorbid pain risk, patients were randomized to receive either duloxetine followed by placebo or placebo followed by duloxetine. Eligibility required that patients have grade 1 or higher sensory neuropathy according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and at least 4 on a scale of 0 to 10, representing average chemotherapy-induced pain, after paclitaxel, other taxane, or oxaliplatin treatment. INTERVENTIONS: The initial treatment consisted of taking 1 capsule daily of either 30 mg of duloxetine or placebo for the first week and 2 capsules of either 30 mg of duloxetine or placebo daily for 4 additional weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary hypothesis was that duloxetine would be more effective than placebo in decreasing chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathic pain. Pain severity was assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form "average pain" item with 0 representing no pain and 10 representing as bad as can be imagined. RESULTS: Individuals receiving duloxetine as their initial 5-week treatment reported a mean decrease in average pain of 1.06 (95% CI, 0.72-1.40) vs 0.34 (95% CI, 0.01-0.66) among those who received placebo (P = .003; effect size, 0.513). The observed mean difference in the average pain score between duloxetine and placebo was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.26-1.20). Fifty-nine percent of those initially receiving duloxetine vs 38% of those initially receiving placebo reported decreased pain of any amount. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, the use of duloxetine compared with placebo for 5 weeks resulted in a greater reduction in pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00489411.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Neuralgia/tratamento farmacológico , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/induzido quimicamente , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/tratamento farmacológico , Qualidade de Vida , Inibidores Seletivos de Recaptação de Serotonina/uso terapêutico , Tiofenos/uso terapêutico , Administração Oral , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos Cross-Over , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Cloridrato de Duloxetina , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/complicações , Resultado do Tratamento
5.
J Cancer Educ ; 28(4): 770-6, 2013 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23872949

RESUMO

Oncologists are now prescribing more oral chemotherapy than ever before, thus placing the onus for taking the right dose at the right time under the right circumstances directly on the patient. This study was undertaken to understand emerging adherence issues and to explore available adherence assessment tools. This two-part study (1) examined N0747, a randomized phase II trial that tested the oral agents, sunitinib and capecitabine, in patients with metastatic esophageal cancer from an adherence standpoint, and (2) conducted a systematic review to compile and assess adherence tools that can be used in future clinical trials. First, in N0747, patients were assigned to sunitinib and capecitabine versus capecitabine; 53 chemotherapy cycles were prescribed to this 12-patient cohort. Nearly all patients denoted that they "always or almost always" took their pills as prescribed, and two patients who reported lack of full adherence suffered from grade 3+ adverse events. Surprisingly, however, over 14 cycles, 9 patients reported grade 3+ toxicity but checked "always or almost always" to describe their adherence. No relationships were observed between adherence and cancer outcomes. Secondly, 21 articles identified the following adherence tools: (1) healthcare providers' interviews, (2) patient-reported adherence with diaries/calendars, (3) patient-completed adherence scales, (4) medication event monitoring, (5) automated voice response, (6) drug/metabolite assays, and (7) prescription databases. Of note, only the automated voice response seems capable of real-time detection of over-adherence, as observed in N0747. Oral chemotherapy adherence should be further studied, particularly from the standpoint of over-adherence.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos Fase II como Assunto , Adesão à Medicação/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Bucais/tratamento farmacológico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Idoso , Capecitabina , Desoxicitidina/administração & dosagem , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Feminino , Fluoruracila/administração & dosagem , Fluoruracila/análogos & derivados , Seguimentos , Humanos , Indóis/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Neoplasias Bucais/secundário , Prognóstico , Pirróis/administração & dosagem , Literatura de Revisão como Assunto , Sunitinibe
6.
J Clin Oncol ; 41(3): 590-598, 2023 01 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36228177

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors (PP-CSFs) are prescribed to reduce febrile neutropenia (FN) but their benefit for intermediate FN risk regimens is uncertain. Within a pragmatic, randomized trial of a standing order entry (SOE) PP-CSF intervention, we conducted a substudy to evaluate the effectiveness of SOE for patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens. METHODS: TrACER was a cluster randomized trial where practices were randomized to usual care or a guideline-based SOE intervention. In the primary study, sites were randomized 3:1 to SOE of automated PP-CSF orders for high FN risk regimens and alerts against PP-CSF use for low-risk regimens versus usual care. A secondary 1:1 randomization assigned 24 intervention sites to either SOE to prescribe or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF for intermediate-risk regimens. Clinicians were allowed to over-ride the SOE. Patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small-cell lung cancer were enrolled. Mixed-effect logistic regression models were used to test differences between randomized sites. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and April 2020, 846 eligible patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens were registered to either SOE to prescribe (12 sites: n = 542) or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF (12 sites: n = 304). Rates of PP-CSF use were higher among sites randomized to SOE (37.1% v 9.9%, odds ratio, 5.91; 95% CI, 1.77 to 19.70; P = .0038). Rates of FN were low and identical between arms (3.7% v 3.7%). CONCLUSION: Although implementation of a SOE intervention for PP-CSF significantly increased PP-CSF use among patients receiving first-line intermediate-risk regimens, FN rates were low and did not differ between arms. Although this guideline-informed SOE influenced prescribing, the results suggest that neither SOE nor PP-CSF provides sufficient benefit to justify their use for all patients receiving first-line intermediate-risk regimens.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Neutropenia Febril , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Prescrições Permanentes , Humanos , Feminino , Fatores Estimuladores de Colônias/uso terapêutico , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/efeitos adversos , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/etiologia , Neutropenia Febril/induzido quimicamente , Neutropenia Febril/tratamento farmacológico , Neutropenia Febril/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamento farmacológico , Modelos Logísticos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias da Mama/etiologia
7.
Cancer ; 118(20): 5171-8, 2012 Oct 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22415454

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel causes an acute pain syndrome (P-APS), occurring within days after each dose and usually abating within days. Paclitaxel also causes a more classic peripheral neuropathy, which steadily increases in severity with increasing paclitaxel total doses. Little detail is available regarding the natural history of these 2 syndromes, or any relationship between them, although a recent publication does provide natural history data about weekly paclitaxel, supporting an association between the severity of P-APS and eventual peripheral neuropathy symptoms. METHODS: Patients entering this study were about to receive paclitaxel and carboplatin every 3 weeks. Daily questionnaires were completed for the first week after every chemotherapy dose, and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire, Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy 20-item instruments were completed weekly. RESULTS: The P-APS severity peaked on day 4 after the initial chemotherapy dose, with 12%, 29%, 23%, and 36% of patients having maximal pain scores of 0, 1 to 4, 5 or 6, or 7 to 10 during the first week after the first dose of therapy, respectively. Patients with P-APS scores of 0 to 4 with the first dose of chemotherapy had less eventual sensory neuropathy than did patients with P-APS scores of 5 to 10 (P = 0.001). With regard to the more peripheral neuropathy, sensory neuropathy was more problematic than was either motor or autonomic neuropathy. Numbness and tingling were more common components of the sensory neuropathy than was pain. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with worse P-APS severities appear to have more eventual chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. This provides support for the concept that P-APS is a form of nerve pathology.


Assuntos
Dor Aguda/induzido quimicamente , Antineoplásicos Fitogênicos/efeitos adversos , Paclitaxel/efeitos adversos , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/induzido quimicamente , Dor Aguda/etiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inquéritos e Questionários , Síndrome
8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(10): e2238191, 2022 10 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36279134

RESUMO

Importance: Colony-stimulating factors are prescribed to patients undergoing chemotherapy to reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia. Research suggests that 55% to 95% of colony-stimulating factor prescribing is inconsistent with national guidelines. Objective: To examine whether a guideline-based standing order for primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors improves use and reduces the incidence of febrile neutropenia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial, the Trial Assessing CSF Prescribing Effectiveness and Risk (TrACER), involved 32 community oncology clinics in the US. Participants were adult patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small cell lung cancer initiating cancer therapy and enrolled between January 2016 and April 2020. Data analysis was performed from July to October 2021. Interventions: Sites were randomized 3:1 to implementation of a guideline-based primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factor standing order system or usual care. Automated orders were added for high-risk regimens, and an alert not to prescribe was included for low-risk regimens. Risk was based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was to find an increase in colony-stimulating factor use among high-risk patients from 40% to 75%, a reduction in use among low-risk patients from 17% to 7%, and a 50% reduction in febrile neutropenia rates in the intervention group. Mixed model logistic regression adjusted for correlation of outcomes within a clinic. Results: A total of 2946 patients (median [IQR] age, 59.0 [50.0-67.0] years; 2233 women [77.0%]; 2292 White [79.1%]) were enrolled; 2287 were randomized to the intervention, and 659 were randomized to usual care. Colony-stimulating factor use for patients receiving high-risk regimens was high and not significantly different between groups (847 of 950 patients [89.2%] in the intervention group vs 296 of 309 patients [95.8%] in the usual care group). Among high-risk patients, febrile neutropenia rates for the intervention (58 of 947 patients [6.1%]) and usual care (13 of 308 patients [4.2%]) groups were not significantly different. The febrile neutropenia rate for patients receiving high-risk regimens not receiving colony-stimulating factors was 14.9% (17 of 114 patients). Among the 585 patients receiving low-risk regimens, colony-stimulating factor use was low and did not differ between groups (29 of 457 patients [6.3%] in the intervention group vs 7 of 128 patients [5.5%] in the usual care group). Febrile neutropenia rates did not differ between usual care (1 of 127 patients [0.8%]) and the intervention (7 of 452 patients [1.5%]) groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial, implementation of a guideline-informed standing order did not affect colony-stimulating factor use or febrile neutropenia rates in high-risk and low-risk patients. Overall, use was generally appropriate for the level of risk. Standing order interventions do not appear to be necessary or effective in the setting of prophylactic colony-stimulating factor prescribing. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02728596.


Assuntos
Fatores Estimuladores de Colônias , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas , Neutropenia Febril , Neoplasias , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores Estimuladores de Colônias/uso terapêutico , Neutropenia Febril/tratamento farmacológico , Neutropenia Febril/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso
10.
JNCI Cancer Spectr ; 4(1): pkz088, 2020 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32337497

RESUMO

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 < .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 < .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.

11.
J Clin Oncol ; 36(25): 2621-2629, 2018 09 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30040523

RESUMO

Purpose Bevacizumab improves progression-free survival but not overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. E5103 tested the effect of bevacizumab in the adjuvant setting in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative disease. Patients and Methods Patients were assigned 1:2:2 to receive placebo with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by weekly paclitaxel (arm A), bevacizumab only during AC and paclitaxel (arm B), or bevacizumab during AC and paclitaxel followed by bevacizumab monotherapy for 10 cycles (arm C). Random assignment was stratified and bevacizumab dose adjusted for choice of AC schedule. Radiation and hormonal therapy were administered concurrently with bevacizumab in arm C. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Results Four thousand nine hundred ninety-four patients were enrolled. Median age was 52 years; 64% of patients were estrogen receptor positive, 27% were lymph node negative, and 78% received dose-dense AC. Chemotherapy-associated adverse events including myelosuppression and neuropathy were similar across all arms. Grade ≥ 3 hypertension was more common in bevacizumab-treated patients, but thrombosis, proteinuria, and hemorrhage were not. The cumulative incidence of clinical congestive heart failure at 15 months was 1.0%, 1.9%, and 3.0% in arms A, B, and C, respectively. Bevacizumab exposure was less than anticipated, with approximately 24% of patients in arm B and approximately 55% of patients in arm C discontinuing bevacizumab before completing planned therapy. Five-year IDFS was 77% (95% CI, 71% to 81%) in arm A, 76% (95% CI, 72% to 80%) in arm B, and 80% (95% CI, 77% to 83%) in arm C. Conclusion Incorporation of bevacizumab into sequential anthracycline- and taxane-containing adjuvant therapy does not improve IDFS or overall survival in patients with high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer. Longer duration bevacizumab therapy is unlikely to be feasible given the high rate of early discontinuation.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Bevacizumab/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias da Mama/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Bevacizumab/efeitos adversos , Quimiorradioterapia Adjuvante/métodos , Ciclofosfamida/administração & dosagem , Ciclofosfamida/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Método Duplo-Cego , Doxorrubicina/administração & dosagem , Doxorrubicina/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/epidemiologia , Humanos , Linfonodos/patologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Paclitaxel/administração & dosagem , Paclitaxel/efeitos adversos , Adulto Jovem
12.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 82(2): 186-95, 2007 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17290726

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare the combination of a nicotine inhaler and bupropion to either treatment alone for initiating smoking abstinence and relapse prevention. METHODS: Smokers were randomized to receive a nicotine inhaler, bupropion, or both for 3 months. At 3 months, smoking-abstinent study participants were randomized to their initial medications or placebo. Participants who were smoking at 3 months were randomized to an alternative treatment regimen or placebo. This study was conducted from July 2001 to January 2003. RESULTS: A total of 1700 smokers were randomized to treatment (phase 1) for 3 months. Among the 941 study participants eligible for randomization to the phase 2 trial, 837 continued in the study. For the phase 2 trial, 405 smoking-abstinent participants were randomized to relapse prevention for 9 additional months, and 432 smokers were randomized to re-treatment for an additional 3 months. At the end of the initial 3 months of treatment (phase 1), 82 (14%) of 566, 145 (26%) of 567, and 194 (34%) of 567 study participants receiving a nicotine inhaler, bupropion, or both, respectively, were abstinent from smoking. Of the 405 smoking-abstinent participants at the end of 3 months, the bupropion group had more smokers than the placebo group (mean No. of smokers, 1.5 vs 1.1; P < .001), and the nicotine inhaler group had higher smoking abstinence rates at 12 months than the placebo group. Those receiving combination therapy had reduced rates of relapse to smoking for the first 3 months of relapse prevention, but this difference disappeared after the initial 3 months. Of the 432 study participants who were smoking at the end of 3 months and who received an alternative treatment regimen, the 223 smokers initially assigned to a nicotine inhaler were more likely to stop smoking at 6 months if they were re-treated with bupropion instead of placebo (8 [7%] of 111 vs 0 [0%] of 112; P = .003), and the 209 smokers initially treated with bupropion and re-treated with a nicotine inhaler did not have significantly higher smoking abstinence rates (6 [6%] of 104 vs 3 [3%] of 105; P = -.50). CONCLUSION: Combined therapy with a nicotine inhaler and bupropion increased smoking abstinence rates. Continuation of the initial combination therapy does not appear to prevent relapse to smoking. Timing of re-treatment and alternative approaches to relapse prevention should be further examined.


Assuntos
Bupropiona/administração & dosagem , Inibidores da Captação de Dopamina/administração & dosagem , Nicotina/administração & dosagem , Agonistas Nicotínicos/administração & dosagem , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Prevenção do Hábito de Fumar , Administração por Inalação , Adulto , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nebulizadores e Vaporizadores , Prevenção Secundária , Resultado do Tratamento
13.
Head Neck ; 39(3): E40-E44, 2017 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28006087

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Salivary ductal carcinoma and carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma (CEPA) are aggressive salivary gland cancers with poor prognosis. The standard of care is resection with or without radiotherapy, and there are no established systemic therapy options. METHODS: We describe 1 patient with metastatic CEPA and 1 patient with metastatic recurrent salivary duct carcinoma whose tumors were evaluated by comprehensive genomic profiling. Testing identified human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) amplification in both patients, and an additional activating HER2 mutation in the CEPA case. RESULTS: Both patients were treated with the HER2-targeting monoclonal antibody trastuzumab (herceptin) plus chemotherapy and experienced rapid responses. Subsequently, both patients were given single-agent maintenance trastuzumab and continue to experience durable disease control. CONCLUSION: Given the poor prognosis for salivary gland cancers and the limited treatment options upon recurrence or metastasis, patients should be tested for all classes of HER2 alterations. In cases with HER2 overexpression or activation, targeted therapies, such as trastuzumab are promising. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 39: E40-E44, 2017.


Assuntos
Adenoma Pleomorfo/tratamento farmacológico , Terapia de Alvo Molecular/métodos , Receptor ErbB-2/efeitos dos fármacos , Receptor ErbB-2/genética , Neoplasias das Glândulas Salivares/tratamento farmacológico , Trastuzumab/uso terapêutico , Adenoma Pleomorfo/genética , Adenoma Pleomorfo/patologia , Adulto , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Biópsia por Agulha , Seguimentos , Humanos , Imuno-Histoquímica , Masculino , Tomografia por Emissão de Pósitrons combinada à Tomografia Computadorizada/métodos , Medição de Risco , Neoplasias das Glândulas Salivares/genética , Neoplasias das Glândulas Salivares/patologia , Resultado do Tratamento
14.
Menopause ; 22(6): 627-32, 2015 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25423327

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Hot flashes are a common symptom in breast cancer survivors that can negatively impact quality of life. Preliminary data suggested that magnesium might be used as an effective low-cost treatment of hot flashes with minimal adverse effects. METHODS: A four-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial was conducted. Postmenopausal women with a history of breast cancer and bothersome hot flashes were randomized into treatment groups of magnesium oxide 800 or 1,200 mg daily or corresponding placebo groups at a 2:2:(1:1) ratio. Hot flash frequency and hot flash score (number × mean severity) were measured using a validated hot flash diary. A 1-week baseline period preceded initiation of study medication. The primary endpoint was intrapatient difference in mean hot flash score between baseline and treatment periods, comparing each magnesium group with the combined placebo groups using a gatekeeping procedure. Results were analyzed using repeated-measures and growth curve models on weekly hot flash scores based on a modified intent-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-nine women enrolled between December 2011 and March 2013. Study groups were well balanced for baseline characteristics. Mean hot flash scores, mean hot flash frequencies, and associated changes during the treatment period were similar for each group. An increased incidence of diarrhea and a corresponding lower incidence of constipation were reported in magnesium arms compared with placebo. No statistically significant difference in other toxicities or quality-of-life measures was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this trial do not support the use of magnesium oxide for hot flashes.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/tratamento farmacológico , Suplementos Nutricionais , Fogachos/tratamento farmacológico , Óxido de Magnésio/uso terapêutico , Menopausa , Neoplasias da Mama/complicações , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Fogachos/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento
15.
J Clin Oncol ; 29(11): 1472-8, 2011 Apr 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21383290

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos Fitogênicos/efeitos adversos , Paclitaxel/efeitos adversos , Dor/induzido quimicamente , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/induzido quimicamente , Doença Aguda , Área Sob a Curva , Distribuição de Qui-Quadrado , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Estudos Prospectivos , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Inquéritos e Questionários , Síndrome
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA