A taste alteration-related scale assesses megestrol to improve chemotherapy-induced anorexia.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy of megestrol in improving chemotherapy-related anorexia by analyzing the related scales of taste alteration. METHODS: We conducted the current study on a group of advanced patients with cancer with two or more chemotherapy cycles. The chemotherapy-induced taste alteration scale (CiTAs) scale helped assess the megestrol effects on basic taste perception, aversive taste changes, unpleasant symptoms, and associated concerns. Furthermore, the Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire scale (SNAQ) helped measure the impact of megestrol on malnutrition likelihood in patients experiencing chemotherapy-induced anorexia. The World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL)-BREF Scale was used to evaluate the quality of life of participants, producing scores related to physical health, psychological well-being, environmental factors, and social relationships. RESULTS: The CiTAs scale assessment indicated that administering megestrol significantly enhanced taste perception among advanced patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Notably, the megestrol group patients showed significantly higher Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ) scores than the control group. The megestrol group patients also exhibited higher physiological (PHYS) scores than their control group counterparts. However, this distinction was not statistically significant. The study findings indicate that patients who received megestrol demonstrated significantly higher scores in psychological (PSYCH) and environmental(ENVIR) domains than the control group. Furthermore, megestrol administration was associated with significantly elevated SOCIL and ENVIR levels in patients. CONCLUSION: The proficient efficacy evaluation of megestrol in enhancing appetite, mitigating malnutrition likelihood, and improving the quality of life of chemotherapy-induced anorexic patients can be achieved through taste-related scales.

Comparison of the effect of levonorgestrel-intrauterine system with or without oral megestrol acetate on fertility-preserving treatment in patients with atypical endometrial hyperplasia: A prospective, open-label, randomized controlled phase II study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of levonorgestrel-intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) with or without oral megestrol acetate (MA) versus MA alone on fertility-preserving treatment in patients with atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH). METHODS: This was a single-center phase II study with an open-label, randomized, controlled trial conducted between July 2017 and June 2020 at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China. A total of 180 patients (18-45 years) with primary AEH were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to the MA (N = 60), LNG-IUS (N = 60), or MA + LNG-IUS (N = 60) groups, in which the patients received MA (160 mg orally daily), LNG-IUS, or MA + LNG-IUS (MA 160 mg orally daily plus LNG-IUS), respectively. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate at 16 weeks of treatment. The secondary endpoints were CR rate at 32 weeks of treatment, adverse events, and recurrence and pregnancy rates. All analyses were conducted in a modified intention to treat (ITT) population who underwent randomization and in whom treatment was initiated. RESULTS: The Kaplan-Meier estimate of 16-week CR rates (with 95% confidence interval) were 19.2% (9.0-29.4%) in the MA group, 35.0% (22.8-47.2%) in the LNG-IUS group, and 29.4% (17.2-41.6%) in the MA + LNG-IUS groups. Side effects such as weight gain, increased nocturnal urine, night sweat, insomnia and edema face seemed to occur less frequently in LNG-IUS group compared with MA group. No difference was found among groups regarding second endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: LNG-IUS or LNG-IUS plus MA did not show significant therapeutic benefit compared with MA alone. Further studies including sufficient sample-size are needed to validate these findings due to the underpowered design of this trial. FUNDING: This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No 2019YFC1005200 and 2019YFC1005204), Shanghai Medical Centre of Key Programs for Female Reproductive Diseases (Grant No. 2017ZZ010616), Shanghai sailing program (Grant No. 19YF1404200), and Shen Kang clinical project (SHDC22021219). Trial registrationClinicalTrials.govNCT03241888. https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT03241888?term=NCT03241888&draw=2&rank=1.

Progestin-associated shift of meningioma mutational landscape.

Background: Meningiomas are the most common primary tumor of the central nervous system. The relationship between meningioma and progestins is frequently mentioned but has not been elucidated. Patients and methods: We identified 40 female patients operated for a meningioma after long-term progestin therapy and performed targeted next generation sequencing to decipher the mutational landscape of hormone-related meningiomas. A published cohort of 530 meningiomas in women was used as a reference population. Results: Compared with the control population of meningiomas in women, progestin-associated meningiomas were more frequently multiple meningiomas [19/40 (48%) versus 25/530 (5%), P < 10-12] and located at the skull base [46/72 (64%) versus 241/481 (50%), P = 0.03]. We found a higher frequency of PIK3CA mutations [14/40 (35%) versus 18/530 (3%), P < 10-8] and TRAF7 mutations [16/40 (40%) versus 140/530 (26%), P < 0.001] and a lower frequency of NF2-related tumors compared with the control population of meningiomas [3/40 (7.5%) versus 169/530 (32%), P < 0.001]. Conclusion: This shift in mutational landscape indicates the vulnerability of certain meningeal cells and mutations to hormone-induced tumorigenesis. While the relationship between PIK3CA mutation frequency and hormone-related cancers such as breast and endometrial cancer is well-known, this hormonally induced mutational shift is a unique feature in molecular oncology.

Megestrol Acetate Induces Declarative Memory Changes and Cortisol Suppression in Healthy Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: The effects of the glucocorticoid and progesterone receptor agonist megestrol on declarative memory, and the ability of phenytoin to block these effects, were assessed. METHODS: Healthy volunteers received each medication combination (placebo and megestrol, phenytoin and megestrol, and placebo and placebo) using a randomized, crossover design. The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test assessed declarative memory. RESULTS: Megestrol was associated with a significant reduction in declarative memory (p = 0.0008), which was attenuated by phenytoin, and was associated with significant cortisol suppression compared to placebo (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Changes in memory and cortisol suppression were found in healthy volunteers given megestrol.

A Phase 2, Randomized, Open-Label Study of Irosustat Versus Megestrol Acetate in Advanced Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Advanced/metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer has a poor prognosis. Malignant endometrial tissue has high steroid sulphatase (STS) activity. The aim of this study was to evaluate STS as a therapeutic target in patients with endometrial cancer. METHODS: This was a phase 2, multicenter, international, open-label, randomized (1:1), 2-arm study of the STS inhibitor oral irosustat 40 mg/d versus oral megestrol acetate 160 mg/d in women with advanced/metastatic or recurrent estrogen receptor-positive endometrial cancer. The primary end point was the proportion of patients without progression or death 6 months after start of treatment. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, time to progression, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were treated (36 with irosustat, 35 with megestrol acetate). The study was prematurely stopped after futility analysis. Overall, 36.1% and 54.1% of patients receiving irosustat or megestrol acetate had not progressed or died at 6 months, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between irosustat and megestrol acetate in response and overall survival rates. Irosustat patients had a median progression-free survival of 16 weeks (90% confidence interval, 9.0-31.4) versus 40 weeks (90% confidence interval, 16.3-64.0) in megestrol acetate patients. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 20 (55.6%) and 13 (37.1%) patients receiving irosustat or megestrol, respectively. Most adverse events in both groups were grade 1 or 2. CONCLUSIONS: Although irosustat monotherapy did not attain a level of activity sufficient for further development in patients with advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer, this study confirms the activity of hormonal treatment (megestrol acetate) for this indication.

Metformin for endometrial hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: Endometrial cancer is one of the most common gynaecological cancers in the world. Rates of endometrial cancer are rising, in part because of rising obesity rates. Endometrial hyperplasia is a precancerous condition in women that can lead to endometrial cancer if left untreated. Endometrial hyperplasia occurs more commonly than endometrial cancer. Progesterone tablets currently used to treat women with endometrial hyperplasia are associated with adverse effects in up to 84% of women. The levonorgestrel intrauterine device (Mirena Coil, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Whippany, NJ, USA) may improve compliance, but it is invasive, is not acceptable to all women, and is associated with irregular vaginal bleeding in 82% of cases. Therefore, an alternative treatment for women with endometrial hyperplasia is needed. Metformin, a drug that is often used to treat people with diabetes, has been shown in some human studies to reverse endometrial hyperplasia. However, the effectiveness and safety of metformin for treatment of endometrial hyperplasia remain uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of metformin in treating women with endometrial hyperplasia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, Google Scholar, OpenGrey, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and two trials registers from inception to 10 January 2017. We searched the bibliographies of all included studies and reviews on this topic. We also handsearched the conference abstracts of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) 2015 and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cross-over trials comparing metformin (used alone or in combination with other medical therapies) versus placebo or no treatment, any conventional medical treatment, or any other active intervention for women with histologically confirmed endometrial hyperplasia of any type. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data from included studies, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We resolved disagreements by discussion or by deferment to a third review author. When study details were missing, review authors contacted study authors. The primary outcome of this review was regression of endometrial hyperplasia histology (with or without atypia) towards normal histology. Secondary outcome measures included recurrence of endometrial hyperplasia, progression of endometrial hyperplasia to endometrial cancer, hysterectomy rate, abnormal uterine bleeding, health-related quality of life, and adverse effects during treatment. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs in which a total of 77 women took part. We rated the quality of the evidence as very low for all outcomes owing to very serious risk of bias (associated with poor reporting, attrition, and limitations in study design) and imprecision.We performed a meta-analysis of two trials with 59 participants. When metformin was compared with megestrol acetate in women with endometrial hyperplasia, we found insufficient evidence to determine whether there were differences between groups for the following outcomes: regression of endometrial hyperplasia histology towards normal histology (odds ratio (OR) 3.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 11.57, two RCTs, n = 59, very low-quality evidence), hysterectomy rates (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.52, two RCTs, n = 59, very low-quality evidence), and rates of abnormal uterine bleeding (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.52, two RCTs, n = 44 , very low-quality evidence). We found no data for recurrence of endometrial hyperplasia or health-related quality of life. Both studies (n = 59) provided data on progression of endometrial hyperplasia to endometrial cancer as well as one (n = 16) reporting some adverse effects in the metformin arm, notably nausea, thrombosis, lactic acidosis, abnormal liver and renal function among others.Another trial including 16 participants compared metformin plus megestrol acetate versus megestrol acetate alone in women with endometrial hyperplasia. We found insufficient evidence to determine whether there were differences between groups for the following outcomes: regression of endometrial hyperplasia histology towards normal histology (OR 9.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 86.52, one RCT, n = 16, very low-quality evidence), recurrence of endometrial hyperplasia among women who achieve regression (OR not estimable, no events recorded, one RCT, n = 8, very low-quality evidence), progression of endometrial hyperplasia to endometrial cancer (OR not estimable, no events recorded, one RCT, n = 13, very low-quality evidence), or hysterectomy rates (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.37, one RCT, n = 16, very low-quality evidence). Investigators provided no data on abnormal uterine bleeding or health-related quality of life. In terms of adverse effects, three of eight participants (37.5%) in the metformin plus megestrol acetate study arm reported nausea. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: At present, evidence is insufficient to support or refute the use of metformin alone or in combination with standard therapy - specifically, megestrol acetate - versus megestrol acetate alone, for treatment of endometrial hyperplasia. Robustly designed and adequately powered randomised controlled trials yielding long-term outcome data are needed to address this clinical question.

Pharmacy Report: Megestrol Acetate-Induced Adrenal Insufficiency.

A man aged 65 years with metastatic renal cell carcinoma presented for evaluation after a recent fall. A thorough workup of the case was performed and secondary adrenal insufficiency induced by the administration of megestrol acetate was determined to be the cause. Adrenal insufficiency is a serious disorder that is a potential adverse event of megestrol acetate, a medication used to help patients with cancer cachexia increase their appetite and gain weight. This association is not well recognized in clinical practice, so this case highlights the importance of distinguishing possible endocrine complications induced by the long-term administration or sudden discontinuation of megestrol acetate.

Pharmacokinetics of a nanocrystal-containing megestrol acetate formulation: a single-dose, randomized, open-label, 2-part, 2-period crossover study in healthy Korean subjects.

UNLABELLED: OBJECTIVE: The conventional suspension of megestrol acetate contains micronized megestrol acetate, which was recently discovered to have a disadvantage of decreasing bioavailability when taken in a fasting state. Since megestrol acetate is taken to increase appetite, this property becomes a discouraging factor. To improve upon this, an advanced formulation was developed using a nanocrystal drug-delivery system. This study was conducted to compare the safety and pharmacokinetic characteristics between the conventional formulation of megestrol acetate and a generic version of the advanced formulation containing nanocrystals. METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, 2-period, 2-treatment, crossover, single-dose, 2-part study (part 1 fasting and part 2 fed), conducted in healthy males aged between 20 and 50 years with weight within ± 20% of ideal body weight having no congenital abnormalities or chronic diseases. Different subjects were used in part 1 and part 2, but subjects received a single dose of the reference and test drugs separated by a 14-day washout period. Blood sampling was performed up to 120 hours after dosing using a pre-specified sampling time scheme. Primary pharmacokinetic parameters were C_max and AUC_last of the test and reference formulations of megestrol acetate. Bioequivalence evaluation was based on the standard criterion of 80 - 125% for the 90% confidence interval of geometric mean ratios of test to reference drugs calculated for the pharmacokinetic parameters. To monitor adverse events, both subject interviews and physical examinations were done on a regular time basis. RESULTS: 80 subjects (n = 40 each part) were enrolled, and 79 completed the study. The 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios of C_max and AUC_last were 4.4625 - 5.6018 and 1.3602 - 1.6418, respectively, for part 1, and 0.9793 - 1.1327 and 0.7721 - 0.8431, respectively, for part 2. No significant difference was discovered in the incidence of adverse events (AEs) when test and reference treated groups were compared. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the test formulation of megestrol-acetate-containing nanocrystals is better absorbed and has higher bioavailability compared to the reference formulation in a fasting state. This should allow for a lower dose and better patient compliance.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02446353.

The Efficacy and Safety of Megestrol Acetate in Protein-Energy Wasting due to Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of oral megestrol acetate (MA) in the management of protein-energy wasting in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). DESIGN: A systematic review of English published literature from 1970 until April 1, 2014. SUBJECTS: All adult patients with CKD including both dialysis and non-dialysis-dependent. INTERVENTION: Oral MA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Efficacy outcomes included changes in body weight, serum albumin, and appetite. Safety outcomes examined included adverse events (AEs) and deaths. RESULTS: A total of 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. No data on MA in non-dialysis CKD patients were available. Statistically significant increases in body weight (range 1.5-5 kg) were reported in 6 trials. Statistically significant increases in albumin (range of 0.22 g/dL-0.52 g/dL) were observed in 5 trials. Improved appetite was observed in 7 trials. All trials were limited by small sample sizes (range 9-32 subjects), short duration (range 8-24 weeks), a high degree of bias, and absence of clinical outcomes such as quality of life or hospitalizations. Forty-seven AEs were reported and included overhydration/excessive fluid gain, diarrhea, hyperglycemia, excessive weight gain, suppressed cortisol levels, thrombophlebitis, nausea/vomiting, confusion/hallucinations, vaginal bleeding, headache/dizziness, and elevated lactate dehydrogenase. There were 26 discontinuations due to death. CONCLUSION: The current evidence for treatment with MA in patients receiving dialysis is sparse with few high-quality trials. The safety of using MA beyond 24 weeks is unknown, and use of MA is associated with significant AEs. At this time, oral MA should be used with significant caution, and only when other treatment options are unavailable.

Use of an ophthalmic formulation of megestrol acetate for the treatment of eosinophilic keratitis in cats.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a compounded ophthalmic formulation of 0.5% megestrol acetate to treat eosinophilic keratitis in cats. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. ANIMALS STUDIED: Seventeen client owned cats with eosinophilic keratitis in one or both eyes. METHODS: Eosinophilic keratitis was confirmed by cytology. At each visit, fluorescein staining and photography were performed. Cats were initially treated q 8-12 h with 0.5% megestrol acetate in an aqueous base. Serum glucose was measured at the first or second reexamination. RESULTS: Fifteen of 17 (88%) cats had a positive response to treatment, with 6 of 17 (35%) having complete resolution at the first reexamination (2-4 weeks). Two of 17 (12%) cats did not respond to treatment. Most cats required a treatment frequency of once daily to once weekly to maintain remission of disease. No ocular irritation or systemic side effects were noted in any cat. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of an ophthalmic formulation of 0.5% megestrol acetate is a viable option for treating feline eosinophilic keratitis.

Activity of megestrol acetate in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer after nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor failure: a phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: As novel treatments carry substantial price tags and are mostly cost-prohibitive in low- and middle-income countries, there is an urgent need to develop alternatives, such as off-patent drugs. Megestrol acetate (MA) has a longstanding history in the treatment of breast cancer, but recently it is being used less often due to the advent of newer agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This two-stage phase II trial evaluated the antitumor activity and toxicity of MA in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive advanced breast cancer who had experienced disease progression on a third-generation nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI). Eligible patients had metastatic breast cancer treated with a NSAI with at least 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), or relapse after ≥1 year on adjuvant NSAI. Patients received MA at a single daily oral dose of 160 mg. Primary end point was clinical benefit rate (CBR). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled. The CBR was 40% [95% confidence interval (CI) 25% to 55%], and the median duration of clinical benefit was 10.0 (95% CI 8.0-14.2) months. The median PFS was 3.9 (95% CI 3.0-4.8) months. The most common grade 3 adverse events were anemia (2%), dyspnea (2%), fatigue (2%), musculoskeletal pain (4%), deep vein thrombosis (10%), and weight gain (2%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of MA in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive disease progressing on a NSAI. MA has demonstrated activity and acceptable tolerability in this setting, and therefore remains a reasonable treatment option in a cost-sensitive environment. These results also provide the background for further evaluation of progestins in the treatment of breast cancer. CLINICAL TRIALS: local trial number, related to the approval by the IRB: CEP 108/06.

Temsirolimus with or without megestrol acetate and tamoxifen for endometrial cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the response, toxicities, and progression free survival of a regimen of temsirolimus with or without hormonal therapy in the treatment of advanced, or recurrent endometrial carcinoma. BACKGROUND: Preclinical evidence suggested that blockade of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway might overcome resistance to hormonal therapy. METHODS: We performed a randomized phase II trial of intravenous temsirolimus 25mg weekly versus the combination of weekly temsirolimus with a regimen of megestrol acetate 80 mg bid for three weeks alternating with tamoxifen 20mg bid for three weeks in women with recurrent or metastatic endometrial carcinoma. RESULTS: There were 71 eligible patients who received at least one dose of therapy with 21 of these treated on the combination arm which was closed early because of an excess of venous thrombosis, with 5 episodes of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and 2 pulmonary emboli. There were three responses observed in that arm (14%). A total of 50 eligible patients were treated on the single agent arm with 3 episodes of DVT and 11 responses (22%). Response rates were similar in patients with prior chemotherapy (7 of 29; 24%) and those with no prior chemotherapy (4 of 21; 19%). Two of four patients with clear cell carcinoma responded. CONCLUSIONS: Adding the combination of megestrol acetate and tamoxifen to temsirolimus therapy did not enhance activity and the combination was associated with an excess of venous thrombosis. Temsirolimus activity was preserved in patients with prior adjuvant chemotherapy.

Phase I/II trial of formoterol fumarate combined with megestrol acetate in cachectic patients with advanced malignancy.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to test the safety, tolerability and efficacy of a novel combination of an anabolic ß2-agonist and an appetite stimulant in patients with cancer cachexia. METHODS: Thirteen patients (M/F 5:8) with advanced malignancy and involuntary weight loss received oral formoterol (80 µg/day) and megestrol acetate (480 mg/day) for up to 8 weeks. Quadriceps size (MRI), quadriceps and hand-grip strength, lower limb extensor power, physical activity and quality of life were measured at baseline and at 8 weeks. Response criteria were specified pre-trial, with a major response defined as an increase in muscle size ≥ 4 % or function ≥ 10 %. RESULTS: Six patients withdrew before 8 weeks, reflecting the frail, comorbid population. In contrast, six out of seven (86 %) patients completing the course achieved a major response for muscle size and/or function. In the six responders, mean quadriceps volume increased significantly (left 0.99 vs. 1.05 L, p=0.012; right 1.02 vs. 1.06 L, p=0.004). There was a trend towards an increase in quadriceps and handgrip strength (p>0.05). The lack of appetite symptom score declined markedly (76.2 vs. 23.8; p=0.005), indicating improvement. Adverse reactions were few, the commonest being tremor (eight reports), peripheral oedema (three), tachycardia (two) and dyspepsia (two). CONCLUSIONS: In this frail cohort with advanced cancer cachexia, an 8-week course of megestrol and formoterol in combination was safe and well tolerated. Muscle mass and/or function were improved to a clinically significant extent in most patients completing the course. This combination regimen warrants further investigation in larger, randomized trials.

Quality of life in patients with pancreatic cancer.

QOL is highly affected in individuals suffering from pancreatic cancer. One parameter that influences negatively QOL in these patients is cancer -cachexia syndrome. During the ASCO Annual Meeting 2014, one abstract focusing on cancer-cachexia syndrome (Abstract #15208) emphasized the fact that cachexia is under diagnosed even in patients with pancreatic cancer who constitute a high-risk group for presenting this syndrome. In addition the abstract raises concerns about the benefit of the use of dronabinol and megestrol acetate in treating the cachexia syndrome in this group of patients. Another important factor that determines QOL in pancreatic cancer patients is surgical procedures-pancreatectomies that these patients may undergo. A very interesting abstract presented also at the ASCO Annual Meeting 2014 (Abstract #15234) explores the benefit of using pasireotide perioperative in ameliorating QOL of patients who had surgical intervention.

Megestrol acetate for treatment of anorexia-cachexia syndrome.

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of a previously published review in The Cochrane Library (2005, Issue 2) on 'Megestrol acetate for the treatment of anorexia-cachexia syndrome'. Megestrol acetate (MA) is currently used to improve appetite and to increase weight in cancer-associated anorexia. In 1993, MA was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of anorexia, cachexia or unexplained weight loss in patients with AIDS. The mechanism by which MA increases appetite is unknown and its effectiveness for anorexia and cachexia in neoplastic and AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) patients is under investigation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of MA in palliating anorexia-cachexia syndrome in patients with cancer, AIDS and other underlying pathologies. SEARCH METHODS: We sought studies through an extensive search of electronic databases, journals, reference lists, contact with investigators and other search strategies outlined in the methods. The most recent search for this update was carried out in May 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included in the review if they assessed MA compared to placebo or other drug treatments in randomised controlled trials of patients with a clinical diagnosis of anorexia-cachexia syndrome related to cancer, AIDS or any other underlying pathology. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors conducted data extraction and evaluated methodological quality. We performed quantitative analyses using appetite and quality of life as a dichotomous variable, and analysed weight gain as continuous and dichotomous variables. MAIN RESULTS: We included 35 trials in this update, the same number but not the same trials as in the previous version of the review. The trials comprised 3963 patients for effectiveness and 3180 for safety. Sixteen trials compared MA at different doses with placebo, seven trials compared different doses of MA with other drug treatments and 10 trials compared different doses of MA. Meta-analysis showed a benefit of MA compared with placebo, particularly with regard to appetite improvement and weight gain in cancer, AIDS and other underlying conditions, and lack of benefit in the same patients when MA was compared to other drugs. There was insufficient information to define the optimal dose of MA, but higher doses were more related to weight improvement than lower doses. Quality of life improvement in patients was seen only when comparing MA versus placebo but not other drugs in both subcategories: cancer and AIDS. Oedema, thromboembolic phenomena and deaths were more frequent in the patients treated with MA. More than 40 side effects were studied. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review shows that MA improves appetite and is associated with slight weight gain in cancer, AIDS and in patients with other underlying pathology. Despite the fact that these patients are receiving palliative care they should be informed of the risks involved in taking MA.

[Clinical efficacy and safety of megestrol acetate vaginal ring].

OBJECTIVE: To explore the efficacy and safety of megestrol acetate silicone vaginal ring. METHODS: A total of 165 healthy child-bearing age women were recruited to examine the efficacy, safety and satisfaction rate of megestrol acetate silicone vaginal ring. RESULTS: The cumulative pregnancy rate of megestrol acetate silicone vaginal ring was 3.93%. And its discontinuation rate was 2.54%, the incidence of adverse events 11.52% and the incidence of adverse effects 1.81% while the symptoms were all slight. The bleeding pattern was similar to that of normal menstruation. Compared with baseline, the elevated level of triglycerides and the reduced level of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) were significantly different while no significant difference existed in high-density lipoprotein (HDL), cholesterol and hemoglobin, etc. The satisfaction rate of megestrol acetate silicone vaginal ring was 94.6% and increased with time. CONCLUSION: Megestrol acetate silicone vaginal ring is an effective and safe option of contraceptives.

A randomized phase III clinical trial of a combined treatment for cachexia in patients with gynecological cancers: evaluating the impact on metabolic and inflammatory profiles and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES: Gynecological neoplastic disease progression is characterized by specific energy metabolism alterations and by symptoms including fatigue, anorexia, nausea, anemia, and immunodepression, which result in a cachexia syndrome and a marked decrease in patient quality of life (QoL). Therapeutic protocols associated with appropriate and effective psychological and social support systems are essential to counteract the symptoms of neoplastic disease in incurable patients. METHODS: A phase III randomized study was performed to establish the most effective and safest treatment to improve the key symptoms in advanced gynecological cancer patients, i.e., lean body mass (LBM), resting energy expenditure (REE), fatigue, and QoL. In addition, the impact of the treatment arms on the main metabolic and inflammatory parameters, including C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin (IL)-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, leptin, reactive oxygen species (ROS), and glutathione peroxidase, was evaluated. The change in the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) during treatment was also assessed. A total of 104 advanced-stage gynecological cancer patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either megestrol acetate (MA) plus l-carnitine, celecoxib, and antioxidants (arm 1) or MA alone (arm 2). The treatment duration was 4 months. RESULTS: The combination arm was more effective than arm 2 with respect to LBM, REE, fatigue, and global QoL. As for the secondary efficacy endpoints, patient appetite increased, and ECOG PS decreased significantly in both arms. The inflammation and oxidative stress parameters IL-6, TNF-α, CRP, and ROS decreased significantly in arm 1, while no significant change was observed in arm 2. CONCLUSIONS: The combined treatment improved both immunometabolic alterations and patient QoL. Multimodality therapies for cachexia ideally should be introduced within a context of "best supportive care" that includes optimal symptom management and careful psychosocial counseling.

A pilot study of adrenal suppression after dexamethasone therapy as an antiemetic in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Dexamethasone has a high therapeutic index when used to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. However, the chronic use of glucocorticoids has been associated with suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Therefore, the authors designed this pilot study to assess the incidence of adrenal insufficiency after dexamethasone therapy as an antiemetic in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: The rapid adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulation test was performed in 103 cancer patients, who had been treated with high-dose dexamethasone as an antiemetic for more than 3 months. When response to the rapid ACTH stimulation test was abnormal, the patient received corticosteroid replacement by prednisolone 7.5 mg daily for 1-2 weeks and after prednisolone replacement, changes in symptoms associated with adrenal insufficiency were investigated using a visual analog scale. RESULTS: Forty-five of the 103 patients (43.7%) showed a suppressed adrenal response to the rapid ACTH stimulation test, and the incidence of adrenal suppression was found to be significantly affected by megestrol acetate use (P = 0.035). Thirty-three patients with a suppressed adrenal function achieved an improvement in quality of life after prednisolone replacement, as determined using a self-report questionnaire (22.9 ± 14.7 to 14.8 ± 11.0, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that suppression of adrenal response is common after antiemetic dexamethasone therapy in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Clinical studies on the treatment of cancer cachexia with megestrol acetate plus thalidomide.

BACKGROUND: The management of cancer-related anorexia/cachexia syndrome (CACS) is a great challenge in clinical practice. To date, practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of CACS are lacking. The authors conducted a randomized study to confirm the effectiveness and safety of treatment of CACS utilizing megestrol acetate (MA) plus thalidomide. METHODS: One hundred and two candidates with CACS were randomly assigned to two treatment groups (trial group and control group): the trial group received MA (160 mg po, bid) plus thalidomide (50 mg po, bid), while the control group received MA (160 mg po, bid) alone. Treatment duration was 8 weeks. RESULTS: Analysis of the trial group demonstrated a significant increase from baseline in body weight (<0.01), quality of life (p = 0.02), appetite (p = 0.01), and grip strength (p = 0.01), and a significant decrease in fatigue, Glasgow Prognostic Score (p = 0.05), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (p = 0.03), IL-6 (p < 0.01), and tumor necrosis factor-α (p = 0.02). In contrast, in the control group, endpoints with a significant improvement from baseline included body weight (p < 0.02) and appetite (p = 0.02). The mean changes in the endpoints from baseline in the trial group were significantly greater compared with the control group: in the primary endpoints, body weight (p = 0.05), fatigue (p < 0.01) and quality of life (p = 0.01), and in the secondary endpoints, grip strength (p = 0.05), Glasgow Prognostic Score (p = 0.02), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (p = 0.02), IL-6 (p < 0.01) and tumor necrosis factor-α (p = 0.01). Toxicity was found to be relatively negligible in both groups. CONCLUSION: A combination regimen of MA and thalidomide is more effective than MA alone in the treatment of CACS.