A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of testosterone for treatment of postmenopausal women with aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgias: Alliance study A221102.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of testosterone supplementation for improving aromatase inhibitor musculoskeletal symptoms (AIMSS). METHODS: Postmenopausal women experiencing moderate-to-severe arthralgias while taking adjuvant aromatase inhibitors for breast cancer were enrolled in this trial. Initially, patients were randomly allocated to receive either a subcutaneous testosterone pellet versus a placebo pellet. Due to slow accrual, the protocol was modified such that additional participants were randomized to receive either a topical testosterone gel or a placebo gel. Changes in patient-reported joint pain were compared between patients receiving testosterone and those receiving placebo using a two-sample t test. Changes in hot flashes and other vasomotor symptoms were also analyzed. Further analyses were conducted to evaluate whether 27 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 14 genes previously associated with AIMSS were associated with testosterone supplementation benefit. RESULTS: While 64% of patients reported an improvement in joint pain at 3 months, there were no significant differences in average pain or joint stiffness at 3 or 6 months between testosterone and placebo arms. Patients receiving testosterone did report improvements in strength, lack of energy, urinary frequency, and stress incontinence (p < 0.05). The subset of patients receiving subcutaneous testosterone also experienced improvements in hot flashes and mood swings. An inherited variant (rs7984870 CC genotype) in TNFSF11 was more likely to be associated with improvements in hot flashes in patients receiving testosterone. CONCLUSION: The doses of testosterone supplementation used in this study did not significantly improve AIMSS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01573442.

Geriatric assessment for older adults receiving less-intensive therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: report of CALGB 361101.

Geriatric assessment (GA) predicts survival among older adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treated intensively. We evaluated the predictive utility of GA among older adults treated with low-intensity therapy on a multisite trial. We conducted a companion study (CALGB 361101) to a randomized phase 2 trial (CALGB 11002) of adults ≥60 years and considered "unfit" for intensive therapy, testing the efficacy of adding bortezomib to decitabine therapy. On 361101, GA and quality of life (QOL) assessment was administered prior to treatment and every other subsequent cycle. Relationships between baseline GA and QOL measures with survival were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox proportional hazards models. One-hundred sixty-five patients enrolled in CALGB 11002, and 96 (52%) of them also enrolled in 361101 (median age, 73.9 years). Among participants, 85.4% completed ≥1 baseline assessment. In multivariate analyses, greater comorbidity (hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index >3), worse cognition (Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration score >4), and lower European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer global QOL scores at baseline were significantly associated with shorter overall survival (P < .05 each) after adjustment for Karnofsky Performance Status, age, and treatment arm. Dependence in instrumental activities of daily living and cognitive impairment were associated with 6-month mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 3.5; confidence interval [CI], 1.2-10.4; and HR, 3.1; CI, 1.1-8.6, respectively). GA measures evaluating comorbidity, cognition, and self-reported function were associated with survival and represent candidate measures for screening older adults planned to receive lower-intensity AML therapies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01420926 (CALGB 11002).

The Influence of Vitamin D on Mammographic Density: Results from CALGB 70806 (Alliance) a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Current therapies for breast cancer prevention only prevent estrogen receptor positive (ER+) disease and toxicity limits use of these agents. Vitamin D is a potential prevention therapy for both ER+ and ER- disease and is safe with few side effects. This study evaluates the effect of 1-year of vitamin D supplementation on mammographic density (MD), a biomarker of breast cancer risk in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Premenopausal women with ≥25% MD and no history of cancer were randomly assigned to 2,000 international units (IU) of vitamin D or placebo orally daily for 1 year. Change in percent MD was evaluated using Cumulus software after all participants completed treatment. Three hundred women enrolled between January 2011 and December 2013 with a mean age of 43 and diverse ethnicity [14% Hispanic, 12% African American (AA)]. Supplementation significantly increased vitamin D levels compared with placebo (14.5 ng/mL vs. -1.6 ng/mL; P < 0.0001) with all participants on the vitamin D arm achieving vitamin D sufficiency at 12 months. Vitamin D was safe and well tolerated. After adjustment for baseline MD, the mean between-arm difference (vitamin D vs. placebo) at 1 year was -0.75 (-0.26, 1.76; P = 0.56). A greater effect was seen for women with ≥50% MD and AA women, although neither reached significance. This randomized controlled trial demonstrated significant improvement in vitamin D levels with 2,000 IU for 1 year, with 100% of supplemented women achieving sufficiency. However, a null effect was seen regarding change in MD for premenopausal women (the primary outcome of the study). PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Current therapies for breast cancer prevention only prevent estrogen receptor positive (ER+) disease and are underutilized due to toxicity and side effects. Vitamin D is a potential prevention therapy for both ER+ and ER- disease and is safe with few side effects.

Dasatinib and dexamethasone followed by hematopoietic cell transplantation for adults with Ph-positive ALL.

Post-remission strategies after dasatinib-corticosteroid induction in adult Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) are not well studied. We evaluated dasatinib and dexamethasone induction then protocol-defined post-remission therapies, including hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Adults (N = 65) with Ph-positive ALL received dasatinib-dexamethasone induction, methotrexate-based central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis, reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, or chemotherapy alone, and dasatinib-based maintenance. Key end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The median age was 60 years (range, 22-87 years). The complete remission rate was 98.5%. With a median follow-up of 59 months, 5-year DFS and OS were 37% (median, 30 months) and 48% (median, 56 months), respectively. For patients receiving RIC allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, or chemotherapy, 5-year DFS were 49%, 29%, and 34%, and 5-year OS were 62%, 57%, and 46%, respectively. Complete molecular response rate after CNS prophylaxis was 40%. Relative to the p190 isoform, p210 had shorter DFS (median 10 vs 34 months, P = .002) and OS (median 16 months vs not reached, P = .05). Relapse occurred in 25% of allogeneic HCT, 57% of autologous HCT, and 36% of chemotherapy patients. T315I mutation was detected in 6 of 8 marrow relapses. Dasatinib CNS concentrations were low. Dasatinib-dexamethasone followed by RIC allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, or chemotherapy was feasible and efficacious, especially with RIC allogeneic HCT. Future studies should address the major causes of failure: T315I mutation, the p210 BCR-ABL1 isoform, and CNS relapse. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01256398.

Adverse Event Burden Score-A Versatile Summary Measure for Cancer Clinical Trials.

This article introduces the adverse event (AE) burden score. The AE burden by treatment cycle is a weighted sum of all grades and AEs that the patient experienced in a cycle. The overall AE burden score is the total AE burden the patient experienced across all treatment cycles. AE data from two completed Alliance multi-center randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials, with different AE profiles (NCCTG 97-24-51: 176 patients, and A091105: 83 patients), were utilized for illustration. Results of the AE burden score analyses corroborated the trials' primary results. In 97-24-51, the overall AE burden for patients on the treatment arm was 2.2 points higher than those on the placebo arm, with a higher AE burden for patients who went off treatment early due to AE. Similarly, in A091105, the overall AE burden was 1.6 points higher on the treatment arm. On the placebo arms, the AE burden in 97-24-51 remained constant over time; and increased in later cycles in A091105, likely attributable to the increase in disease morbidity. The AE burden score enables statistical comparisons analogous to other quantitative endpoints in clinical trials, and can readily accommodate different trial settings, diseases, and treatments, with diverse AE profiles.

Remarks on the design and analyses of longitudinal studies for cancer patients with anorexia and weight loss.

Longitudinal data serve an important role in understanding the cancer anorexia weight loss syndrome and in testing interventions to palliative and treat patients who develop this syndrome. The element of time and the interrelatedness of data points define longitudinal data and add to the richness of this type of data. However, longitudinal data can also give rise to non-random, missing data that can lead to flawed conclusions. This paper discusses these issues and suggests practical considerations for design and analysis of longitudinal cancer anorexia weight loss studies.

Physician-Reported Experience and Understanding of Adverse Event Attribution in Cancer Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVES: To report the results of a survey conducted among Mayo Clinic medical oncologists, hematologists, and cancer prevention specialists to better understand the current practice of determining whether an adverse event that a patient experience in a clinical trial is related to the drug under investigation, a process commonly known as attribution, as well as to formulate recommendations for an improved system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic survey was developed and conducted (from August 2 through 29, 2017) among 165 medical oncologists, hematologists, and cancer prevention specialists at the 3 Mayo Clinic sites: Rochester, Minnesota; Scottsdale, Arizona; and Jacksonville, Florida. The survey included 21 items that queried clinicians about their clinical practice and trial experience, their training and process in adverse event attribution assignment, and their recommendations for improving the current attribution system. RESULTS: Thirty-seven percent (61 of 165) of physicians responded to the survey. The median number of years in clinical practice was 15 (range, 1-64) and that of clinical trial experience 12. Eighty-nine percent (54 of 61) had served as a trial principal investigator. Only 15% (9 of 60) of responders reported having received any formal attribution training. Eighty percent (48 of 60) were confident about their ability to assign attribution. Seventy-five percent (45 of 60) consulted their colleagues or study chair when assigning attribution. Sixty-seven percent (40 of 60) recommended formal training to improve attribution accuracy. CONCLUSION: Very few clinical trialists in our survey received any formal training for adverse event attribution, yet most identified formal training as effective means to improve attribution accuracy. These data underscore an unmet need of formal adverse event attribution training among clinical trialists.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation compared to chemotherapy consolidation in older acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients 60-75 years in first complete remission (CR1): an alliance (A151509), SWOG, ECOG-ACRIN, and CIBMTR study.

The preferred post-remission therapy for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission (CR1) remains uncertain. In this retrospective, multicenter study, we compared the outcomes for older AML patients (age 60-77 years) receiving allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) (n = 431) with those treated on prospective National Clinical Trials Network induction and nontransplantation chemotherapy (CT) consolidation trials (n = 211). AlloHCT patients were younger (median age: 64.2 versus 67.9 years, p < 0.001), but more frequently had high-risk AML (high WBC, secondary AML, and unfavorable cytogenetics). Overall survival (OS) was worse in alloHCT during the first 9 months after CR1 (HR = 1.52, p = 0.02), but was significantly better thereafter (HR = 0.53, p < 0.0001) relative to CT. Treatment-related mortality (TRM) following HCT was worse in the first 9 months (HR = 2.8, 95% CI: 1.5-5.2, p = 0.0009), while post-HCT relapse was significantly less frequent beyond 9 months (HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.29-0.61, p < 0.0001). Despite higher early TRM, alloHCT recipients had superior long-term OS [29% (24-34%) versus CT 13.8% (9-21%) at 5 years]. Although this is a retrospective analysis with potential biases, it indicates that alloHCT led to heightened early risks from TRM, yet reduced relapse and superior long-term survival relative to CT in older AML patients in CR1.