Neoadjuvant 5-FU or Capecitabine Plus Radiation With or Without Oxaliplatin in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project R-04 was designed to determine whether the oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine could be substituted for continuous infusion 5-FU in the curative setting of stage II/III rectal cancer during neoadjuvant radiation therapy and whether the addition of oxaliplatin could further enhance the activity of fluoropyrimidine-sensitized radiation. METHODS: Patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer undergoing preoperative radiation were randomly assigned to one of four chemotherapy regimens in a 2x2 design: CVI 5-FU or oral capecitabine with or without oxaliplatin. The primary endpoint was local-regional tumor control. Time-to-event endpoint distributions were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios were estimated from Cox proportional hazard models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Among 1608 randomized patients there were no statistically significant differences between regimens using 5-FU vs capecitabine in three-year local-regional tumor event rates (11.2% vs 11.8%), 5-year DFS (66.4% vs 67.7%), or 5-year OS (79.9% vs 80.8%); or for oxaliplatin vs no oxaliplatin for the three endpoints of local-regional events, DFS, and OS (11.2% vs 12.1%, 69.2% vs 64.2%, and 81.3% vs 79.0%). The addition of oxaliplatin was associated with statistically significantly more overall and grade 3-4 diarrhea (P < .0001). Three-year rates of local-regional recurrence among patients who underwent R0 resection ranged from 3.1 to 5.1% depending on the study arm. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous infusion 5-FU produced outcomes for local-regional control, DFS, and OS similar to those obtained with oral capecitabine combined with radiation. This study establishes capecitabine as a standard of care in the pre-operative rectal setting. Oxaliplatin did not improve the local-regional failure rate, DFS, or OS for any patient risk group but did add considerable toxicity.

Capecitabine and oxaliplatin in the preoperative multimodality treatment of rectal cancer: surgical end points from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04.

PURPOSE: The optimal chemotherapy regimen administered concurrently with preoperative radiation therapy (RT) for patients with rectal cancer is unknown. National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04 compared four chemotherapy regimens administered concomitantly with RT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer who were undergoing preoperative RT (45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks plus a boost of 5.4 Gy to 10.8 Gy in three to six daily fractions) were randomly assigned to one of the following chemotherapy regimens: continuous intravenous infusional fluorouracil (CVI FU; 225 mg/m(2), 5 days per week), with or without intravenous oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) once per week for 5 weeks) or oral capecitabine (825 mg/m(2) twice per day, 5 days per week), with or without oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) once per week for 5 weeks). Before random assignment, the surgeon indicated whether the patient was eligible for sphincter-sparing surgery based on clinical staging. The surgical end points were complete pathologic response (pCR), sphincter-sparing surgery, and surgical downstaging (conversion to sphincter-sparing surgery). RESULTS: From September 2004 to August 2010, 1,608 patients were randomly assigned. No significant differences in the rates of pCR, sphincter-sparing surgery, or surgical downstaging were identified between the CVI FU and capecitabine regimens or between the two regimens with or without oxaliplatin. Patients treated with oxaliplatin experienced significantly more grade 3 or 4 diarrhea (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Administering capecitabine with preoperative RT achieved similar rates of pCR, sphincter-sparing surgery, and surgical downstaging compared with CVI FU. Adding oxaliplatin did not improve surgical outcomes but added significant toxicity. The definitive analysis of local tumor control, disease-free survival, and overall survival will be performed when the protocol-specified number of events has occurred.

The use of Valeriana officinalis (Valerian) in improving sleep in patients who are undergoing treatment for cancer: a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study (NCCTG Trial, N01C5).

Sleep disorders are a substantial problem for cancer survivors, with prevalence estimates ranging from 23% to 61%. Although numerous prescription hypnotics are available, few are approved for long-term use or have demonstrated benefit in this circumstance. Hypnotics may have unwanted side effects and are costly, and cancer survivors often wish to avoid prescription drugs. New options with limited side effects are needed. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy of a Valerian officinalis supplement for sleep in people with cancer who were undergoing cancer treatment. Participants were randomized to receive 450 mg of valerian-or placebo orally 1 hour before bedtime for 8 weeks. The primary end point was area under the curve (AUC) of the overall Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Secondary outcomes included the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire, the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), and the Profile of Mood States (POMS). Toxicity was evaluated with both self-reported numeric analogue scale questions and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 3.0. Questionnaires were completed at baseline and at 4 and 8 weeks. A total of 227 patients were randomized into this study between March 19, 2004, and March 9, 2007, with 119 being evaluable for the primary end point. The AUC over the 8 weeks for valerian was 51.4 (SD = 16), while that for placebo was 49.7 (SD = 15), with a P value of 0.6957. A supplemental, exploratory analysis revealed that several fatigue end points, as measured by the BFI and POMS, were significantly better for those taking valerian over placebo. Participants also reported less trouble with sleep and less drowsiness on valerian than placebo. There were no significant differences in toxicities as measured by self-report or the CTCAE except for mild alkaline phosphatase increases, which were slightly more common in the placebo group. This study failed to provide data to support the hypothesis that valerian, 450 mg, at bedtime could improve sleep as measured by the PSQI. However, exploratory analyses revealed improvement in some secondary outcomes, such as fatigue. Further research with valerian exploring physiologic effects in oncology symptom management may be warranted.

Evaluation of shark cartilage in patients with advanced cancer: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group trial.

BACKGROUND: Shark cartilage has been a popular complementary or alternative medicine intervention. The basis for this popularity is the claim that sharks rarely get cancer because of the high proportion of cartilage in the shark's body. However, early studies were equivocal. Therefore, a clinical trial was conducted to look at the impact of shark cartilage in patients with advanced cancer. The primary goal of this trial was to determine whether a shark cartilage product improved overall survival for patients with advanced cancer who were getting standard care. Secondary research goals were to evaluate toxicities, tolerability, and quality of life associated with this shark cartilage product. METHODS: The study was a two-arm, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, clinical trial. Patients with incurable breast or colorectal carcinoma had to have good performance status and organ function. Patients could be receiving chemotherapy. Patients were all to receive standard care and then to be randomly selected to receive either a shark cartilage product or an identical-appearing and smelling placebo 3 to 4 times each day. RESULTS: Data on a total of 83 evaluable patients were analyzed. There was no difference in overall survival between patients receiving standard care plus a shark cartilage product versus standard care plus placebo. Likewise, there was no suggestion of improvement in quality of life for patients receiving the shark cartilage, compared with those receiving placebo. CONCLUSION: This trial was unable to demonstrate any suggestion of efficacy for this shark cartilage product in patients with advanced cancer.

The efficacy of acupressure and acustimulation wrist bands for the relief of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. A University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program multicenter study.

As an adjunct to standard antiemetics for the relief of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (NV), 739 patients were randomly assigned to either: 1) acupressure bands, 2) an acustimulation band, or 3) a no band control condition. Patients in the acupressure condition experienced less nausea on the day of treatment compared to controls (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in delayed nausea or vomiting among the three treatment conditions. Additional analyses revealed pronounced gender differences. Men in the acustimulation condition, but not the acupressure condition, had less NV compared to controls (P<0.05). No significant differences among the three treatment conditions were observed in women, although the reduction in nausea on the day of treatment in the acupressure, compared to the no band condition, closely approached statistical significance (P=0.052). Expected efficacy of the bands was related to outcomes for the acupressure but not the acustimulation conditions.