A Randomized Multicenter Phase II Study of Docosahexaenoic Acid in Patients with a History of Breast Cancer, Premalignant Lesions, or Benign Breast Disease.

Obesity, a cause of subclinical inflammation, is a risk factor for the development of postmenopausal breast cancer and is associated with poorer cancer outcomes. Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), an omega-3 fatty acid, possesses anti-inflammatory properties. We hypothesized that treatment with DHA would reduce the expression of proinflammatory genes and aromatase, the rate-limiting enzyme for estrogen biosynthesis, in benign breast tissue of overweight/obese women. A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase II study of DHA given for 12 weeks to overweight/obese women with a history of stage I-III breast cancer, DCIS/LCIS, Paget's disease, or proliferative benign breast disease was carried out. In this placebo controlled trial, the primary objective was to determine whether DHA (1,000 mg by mouth twice daily) reduced breast tissue levels of TNFα. Secondary objectives included evaluation of the effect of DHA on breast tissue levels of COX-2, IL1ß, aromatase, white adipose tissue inflammation, and gene expression by RNA-seq. Red blood cell fatty acid levels were measured to assess compliance. From July 2013 to November 2015, 64 participants were randomized and treated on trial (32 women per arm). Increased levels of omega-3 fatty acids in red blood cells were detected following treatment with DHA (P < 0.001) but not placebo. Treatment with DHA did not alter levels of TNFα (P = 0.71), or other biomarkers including the transcriptome in breast samples. Treatment with DHA was overall well-tolerated. Although compliance was confirmed, we did not observe changes in the levels of prespecified biomarkers in the breast after treatment with DHA when compared with placebo. Cancer Prev Res; 11(4); 203-14. ©2018 AACRSee related editorial by Fabian and Kimler, p. 187.

Missing documentation in breast cancer survivors: genitourinary syndrome of menopause.

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer survivors often take hormonal treatments to prevent the recurrence of breast cancer, particularly aromatase inhibitors that can worsen the symptoms of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) such as dyspareunia, dysuria, and urinary incontinence, all of which may adversely affect survivors' quality of life. Few breast cancer survivors experiencing GSM receive adequate assessment or treatment. METHODS: In this descriptive study, we reviewed medical records for documented GSM and any treatments administered or referrals for treatment in 800 female patients who visited the Breast Cancer Survivorship Clinic at a comprehensive cancer center between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011, either at least 5 years after completion of treatment for invasive breast cancer or at least 6 months after completion of treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ. RESULTS: Of the 279 patients with documented symptoms of vaginal atrophy, only 111 (39.8%) had documentation of having received any form of treatment or referral. Of the 71 patients with documented symptoms of urinary tract atrophy, only 33.8% had documentation of having received treatment or referral for treatment. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer survivors often experience GSM due to lack of estrogen. The worrisome lack of documentation of assessment or treatment for GSM in a large breast cancer survivorship practice reveals missed opportunities to improve quality of life. Dissemination of recent progress in the development of GSM assessment tools, patient handouts, and new treatments to providers who care for breast cancer survivors is needed to improve this process.

A Qualitative Study of Motivations for Minority Recruitment in Cancer Clinical Trials Across Five NCI-Designated Cancer Centers.

BACKGROUND: Minority enrollment in cancer clinical trials is traditionally low. In light of this fact, numerous studies have investigated barriers to recruitment and retention within minority populations. However, very little research has investigated the importance of clinicians' and researchers' motivations for minority recruitment in cancer clinical trials. Therefore, we sought to examine motivations for minority recruitment across four professional stakeholder groups (principal investigators, clinicians, research staff, and Cancer Center leaders) at five National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers. METHODS: This study is based on the data from 91 qualitative interviews conducted across the five NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers to investigate stakeholders' motivations for minority recruitment in cancer clinical trials. RESULTS: Emergent themes include (a) minority recruitment increases generalizability of cancer clinical trials, (b) minority recruitment is motivated by social justice, (c) some institutions promote minority recruitment through the use of supplemental financial support, (d) federal funding requirements for minority inclusion in clinical research motivate investigators to focus on minority recruitment, and (e) some stakeholders favor a more race-neutral approach to participant recruitment rather than an emphasis on targeted minority recruitment. CONCLUSION: The perspectives of clinical and research stakeholders potentially inform the assessment of existing strategies and the development of new strategies to increase motivation for minority recruitment in cancer clinical trials.

Increasing Minority Enrollment Onto Clinical Trials: Practical Strategies and Challenges Emerge From the NRG Oncology Accrual Workshop.

Racial and ethnic diversity has historically been difficult to achieve in National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials, even while as many as 80% of those trials have faced difficulty in meeting overall recruitment targets. In an attempt to address these issues, NRG Oncology recently convened a comprehensive workshop titled "Clinical Trials Enrollment: Challenges and Opportunities." Discussants at the workshop included representatives of the three legacy groups of the NRG (ie, Gynecologic Oncology Group, National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Program, and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group), a minority-based community clinical oncology program, a large integrated health care system, the leadership of the National Cancer Institute, and a large patient advocacy group. This article summarizes the concepts discussed at the workshop, which included: needs assessments, infrastructural support, training of investigators and research staff, specific clinical trial recruitment strategies (both system and community based), and development and mentoring of young investigators. Many new, more specific tactics, including use of diverse cancer care settings, direct-to-consumer communication, and the need for centralized information technology such as the use of software to match trials to special populations, are presented. It was concluded that new, innovative trial designs and the realities of limited funding would require the adoption of effective and efficient recruiting strategies, specialized training, and stakeholder engagement. US clinical research programs must generate and embrace new ideas and pilot test novel recruitment strategies if they are to maintain their historic role as world leaders in cancer care innovation and delivery.

Retention of black and white participants in the selenium and vitamin E cancer prevention trial (SWOG-coordinated intergroup study S0000).

BACKGROUND: Disproportionally low retention of minority populations can adversely affect the generalizability of clinical research trials. We determine the overall retention rates for White and Black participants from the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) and explore participant and site characteristics associated with retention failure (study disengagement) for these groups. METHODS: A secondary analysis of 28,118 White (age ≥55), and 4,322 Black (age ≥ 50) SELECT participants used multivariate Cox regression to estimate overall retention rates and to calculate HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Blacks had higher age-adjusted risk of disengagement than Whites (HR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.77-2.08). Among Black participants, those ages 50 to 54 were at three times the risk of disengagement than those ≥65 years of age (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 2.41-5.41). Blacks age ≥65 had 1.6 times the risk of disengagement than Whites age ≥65 (HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.38-1.87). By 6 years after randomization, 84% of Whites and 69% of Blacks remained engaged in the study. Current smoking status was an independent risk factor for study disengagement for both White and Black participants. For both groups, sites whose staffs missed SELECT training sessions or who received SELECT Retention and Adherence grants were associated with increased and decreased disengagement risks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SELECT retention was disproportionately lower for Blacks than for Whites. IMPACT: The observed difference in retention rates for Blacks and Whites and factors identified by race for study disengagement in SELECT may inform retention efforts for future long-term, cancer prevention trials.

Moving a randomized clinical trial into an observational cohort.

BACKGROUND: The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled prostate cancer prevention study funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and conducted by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG). A total of 35,533 men were assigned randomly to one of the four treatment groups (vitamin E + placebo, selenium + placebo, vitamin E + selenium, and placebo + placebo). The independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) recommended the discontinuation of study supplements because of the lack of efficacy for risk reduction and because futility analyses demonstrated no possibility of benefit of the supplements to the anticipated degree (25% reduction in prostate cancer incidence) with additional follow-up. Study leadership agreed that the randomized trial should be terminated but believed that the cohort should be maintained and followed as the additional follow-up would contribute important information to the understanding of the biologic consequences of the intervention. Since the participants no longer needed to be seen in person to assess acute toxicities or to be given study supplements, it was determined that the most efficient and cost-effective way to follow them was via a central coordinated effort. PURPOSE: A number of changes were necessary at the local Study Sites and SELECT Statistical Center to transition to following participants via a Central Coordinating Center. We describe the transition process from a randomized clinical trial to the observational Centralized Follow-Up (CFU) study. METHODS: The process of transitioning SELECT, implemented at more than 400 Study Sites across the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico, entailed many critical decisions and actions including updates to online documents such as the SELECT Workbench and Study Manual, a protocol amendment, reorganization of the Statistical Center, creation of a Transition Committee, development of materials for SELECT Study Sites, development of procedures to close Study Sites, and revision of data collection procedures and the process by which to contact participants. RESULTS: At the time of the publication of the primary SELECT results in December 2008, there were 32,569 men alive and currently active in the trial. As of 31 December 2011, 17,761 participants had been registered to the CFU study. This number is less than had been anticipated due to unforeseen difficulties with local Study Site institutional review boards (IRBs). However, from this cohort, we estimate that an additional 580 prostate cancer cases and 215 Gleason 7 or higher grade cancers will be identified. Over 109,000 individual items have been mailed to participants. Active SELECT ancillary studies have continued. The substantial SELECT biorepository is available to researchers; requests to use the specimens are reviewed for feasibility and scientific merit. As of April 2012, 12 proposals had been approved. LIMITATIONS: The accrual goal of the follow-up study was not met, limiting our power to address the study objectives satisfactorily. The CFU study is also dependent on a number of factors including continued funding, continued interest of investigators in the biorepository, and the continued contribution of the participants. Our experience may be less pertinent to investigators who wish to follow participants in a treatment trial or participants in prevention trials in other medical areas. CONCLUSIONS: Extended follow-up of participants in prevention research is important to study the long-term effects of the interventions, such as those used in SELECT. The approach taken by SELECT investigators was to continue to follow participants centrally via an annual questionnaire and with a web-based option. The participants enrolled in the CFU study represent a large, well-characterized, generally healthy cohort. The CFU has enabled us to collect additional prostate and other cancer endpoints and longer follow-up on the almost 18,000 participants enrolled. The utility of the extensive biorepository that was developed during the course of the SELECT is enhanced by longer follow-up.

Prostate cancer screening.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in American men. Although the use of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test for prostate cancer screening since the 1990s has led to increased early diagnoses, the most recent studies are in conflict about the risks and benefits of routine prostate cancer screening. Recently, evidence has emerged to support the use of the PSA test to lower mortality, but there is still concern that over-diagnosis may lead to over-treatment of cancers that would not significantly affect patients' health for several years. This article describes the results of important recent prostate cancer screening trials, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Cancer Society screening guidelines, and discusses the implications for clinical practice.

Impact of supplemental site grants to increase African American accrual for the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial.

BACKGROUND: African American accrual to prevention trials at rates representative of the disease burden experienced by this population requires additional resources and focused efforts. PURPOSE: To describe the rationale, context, and criteria for selection of sites that received Minority Recruitment Enhancement Grants (MREGs) to increase African American recruitment to the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT). To determine if African American accrual was higher among the 15 MREG sites when compared with similar nonawarded sites. METHODS: Changes in African American accrual at sites that received MREGs are compared with changes in a group of 15, frequency-matched, nonawarded sites using a quasi-experimental, post hoc analysis. Successful and unsuccessful recruitment strategies reported by the MREG sites are described. RESULTS: The increased number of African American participants accrued per month at MREG sites post-funding was higher than the change at comparison sites by a factor of 3.38 (p = 0.004, 95% CI: 1.51-7.57). An estimated 602 additional African American participants were recruited at MREG sites due to MREG funding, contributing to the overall 14.9% African American recruitment. Successful recruitment strategies most reported by MREG sites included increasing staff, transportation resources, recruiting through the media, mailings, and prostate cancer screening clinics during off-hours. LIMITATIONS: Comparison sites were chosen retrospectively, not by randomization. Although comparison sites were selected to be similar to MREG sites with regard to potential confounding factors, it is possible that unknown factors could have biased results. Cost-effective analyses were not conducted. CONCLUSIONS: MREG sites increased African American accrual in the post-funding period more than comparison sites, indicating MREG funding enhanced the sites' abilities to accrue African American participants. Targeted grants early in the accrual period may be a useful multi-site intervention to increase African American accrual for a prevention study where adequate African American representation is essential.

Effect of selenium and vitamin E on risk of prostate cancer and other cancers: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT).

CONTEXT: Secondary analyses of 2 randomized controlled trials and supportive epidemiologic and preclinical data indicated the potential of selenium and vitamin E for preventing prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether selenium, vitamin E, or both could prevent prostate cancer and other diseases with little or no toxicity in relatively healthy men. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial (Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial [SELECT]) of 35,533 men from 427 participating sites in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico randomly assigned to 4 groups (selenium, vitamin E, selenium + vitamin E, and placebo) in a double-blind fashion between August 22, 2001, and June 24, 2004. Baseline eligibility included age 50 years or older (African American men) or 55 years or older (all other men), a serum prostate-specific antigen level of 4 ng/mL or less, and a digital rectal examination not suspicious for prostate cancer. INTERVENTIONS: Oral selenium (200 microg/d from L-selenomethionine) and matched vitamin E placebo, vitamin E (400 IU/d of all rac-alpha-tocopheryl acetate) and matched selenium placebo, selenium + vitamin E, or placebo + placebo for a planned follow-up of minimum of 7 years and a maximum of 12 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prostate cancer and prespecified secondary outcomes, including lung, colorectal, and overall primary cancer. RESULTS: As of October 23, 2008, median overall follow-up was 5.46 years (range, 4.17-7.33 years). Hazard ratios (99% confidence intervals [CIs]) for prostate cancer were 1.13 (99% CI, 0.95-1.35; n = 473) for vitamin E, 1.04 (99% CI, 0.87-1.24; n = 432) for selenium, and 1.05 (99% CI, 0.88-1.25; n = 437) for selenium + vitamin E vs 1.00 (n = 416) for placebo. There were no significant differences (all P>.15) in any other prespecified cancer end points. There were statistically nonsignificant increased risks of prostate cancer in the vitamin E group (P = .06) and type 2 diabetes mellitus in the selenium group (relative risk, 1.07; 99% CI, 0.94-1.22; P = .16) but not in the selenium + vitamin E group. CONCLUSION: Selenium or vitamin E, alone or in combination at the doses and formulations used, did not prevent prostate cancer in this population of relatively healthy men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00006392.

Designing the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT).

Prostate cancer continues to be a major health threat, especially among African American men. The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT), which opened on July 25, 2001, was planned to study possible agents for the prevention of prostate cancer in a population of 32,400 men in the United States, including Puerto Rico, and Canada. SELECT is a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial of selenium (200 microg/day from L-selenomethionine) and/or vitamin E (400 IU/day of all rac alpha-tocopheryl acetate) supplementation for a minimum of 7 years (maximum of 12 years) in non-African American men at least 55 years of age and African American men at least 50 years of age. SELECT is a large, simple trial that conforms as closely as possible with community standards of care. This commentary discusses the design problems the SELECT investigators had to resolve in developing the trial, including the role of prostate cancer screening, the best forms and doses of the study agents, and estimation of the event (prostate cancer) rate of men on the placebo arm.