Prolonged Response to Regorafenib in a Patient with Iodine Refractory Thyroid Cancer.

Thyroid cancer is the most common type of endocrine malignancy. Cornerstones of thyroid cancer treatment include surgery, radioactive iodine ablation, and thyroid stimulating hormone suppression. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend two tyrosine kinase inhibitors for thyroid cancer patients who are non-responsive to iodine: sorafenib and lenvatinib. Another oral kinase inhibitor, regorafenib, is not considered standard of care treatment for differentiated thyroid cancer. The chemical structures of regorafenib and sorafenib differ by a single fluorine atom. Given the significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) of sorafenib compared to placebo demonstrated in the phase 3 DECISION trial, we report on a patient with iodine-refractory follicular thyroid cancer treated with regorafenib as part of a phase 1 clinical trial. A 75 year old woman was diagnosed with follicular thyroid carcinoma in 2006 and initiated on treatment with regorafenib in 2011. She has completed 76 cycles with stable disease and pulmonary metastases 34% smaller than baseline.

Nutritional intervention with fish oil provides a benefit over standard of care for weight and skeletal muscle mass in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer receiving chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Involuntary weight loss is a major contributor to mortality and morbidity in patients with advanced cancer. Nutritional intervention with fish oil (FO)-derived eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) may prevent deterioration of body composition. This study compared intervention with FO with standard of care (SOC; no intervention) with regard to weight, skeletal muscle, and adipose tissue in newly referred patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer from the time of initiation to completion of first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: Forty patients completed the study; there were 16 in the FO group (dose of 2.2 g of EPA/day) and 24 patients in the SOC group. Skeletal muscle and adipose tissue were measured using computed tomography images. Blood was collected and weight was recorded at baseline and throughout chemotherapy. RESULTS: Patients in the SOC group experienced an average weight loss of 2.3 ± 0.9 kg whereas patients receiving FO maintained their weight (0.5 ± 1.0 kg) (P = .05). Patients with the greatest increase in plasma EPA concentration after FO supplementation were found to have the greatest gains in muscle (r(2) = 0.55; P = .01). Approximately 69% of patients in the FO group gained or maintained muscle mass. Comparatively, only 29% of patients in the SOC group maintained muscle mass, and overall the SOC group lost 1 kg of muscle. No difference in total adipose tissue was observed between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional intervention with 2.2 g of FO per day appears to provide a benefit over SOC, resulting in the maintenance of weight and muscle mass during chemotherapy.

Supplementation with fish oil increases first-line chemotherapy efficacy in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Palliative chemotherapy is aimed at increasing survival and palliating symptoms. However, the response rate to first-line chemotherapy in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is less than 30%. Experimental studies have shown that supplementation with fish oil (FO) can increase chemotherapy efficacy without negatively affecting nontarget tissue. This study evaluated whether the combination of FO and chemotherapy (carboplatin with vinorelbine or gemcitabine) provided a benefit over standard of care (SOC) on response rate and clinical benefit from chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Forty-six patients completed the study, n = 31 in the SOC group and n = 15 in the FO group (2.5 g EPA + DHA/day). Response to chemotherapy was determined by clinical examination and imaging. Response rate was defined as the sum of complete response plus partial response, and clinical benefit was defined as the sum of complete response, partial response, and stable disease divided by the number of patients. Toxicities were graded by a nurse before each chemotherapy cycle. Survival was calculated 1 year after study enrollment. RESULTS: Patients in the FO group had an increased response rate and greater clinical benefit compared with the SOC group (60.0% vs 25.8%, P = .008; 80.0% vs 41.9%, P = .02, respectively). The incidence of dose-limiting toxicity did not differ between groups (P = .46). One-year survival tended to be greater in the FO group (60.0% vs 38.7%; P = .15). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SOC, supplementation with FO results in increased chemotherapy efficacy without affecting the toxicity profile and may contribute to increased survival.