Dietary Magnesium Replacement for Prevention of Hypomagnesemia in Patients With Ovarian Cancer Receiving Carboplatin-Based Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Hypomagnesemia is a common side effect of platinum-based chemotherapy and predicts poor overall survival in some cancers. Standard magnesium replacement strategies are often inadequate for maintaining magnesium levels. We hypothesized that a daily dietary magnesium replacement approach through magnesium-rich foods would help maintain adequate magnesium levels during platinum-based treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective feasibility study of magnesium-rich diets in patients 18 years and older with previously untreated ovarian cancer scheduled to receive carboplatin-containing chemotherapy of at least six consecutive cycles. Education about magnesium-rich diets was provided at enrollment and then weekly during chemotherapy. Feasibility was defined as ≥60% completion of dietary recalls and ≥280 mg average daily dietary magnesium intake across all patients. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 26 patients enrolled completed at least five chemotherapy cycles and were included in the analysis. Adherence to the study diet was 76%. Daily dietary magnesium intake was 100.5 mg at baseline and increased throughout each cycle: 6% of patients at baseline, 24% after the first cycle, and 67% after the fifth cycle reached ≥280-mg/day magnesium intake. Seven (33%) of 21 had at least one incident of hypomagnesemia. Patients who were adherent had significantly lower incidence of hypomagnesemia (19% v 80%, P = .03) and less need for intravenous magnesium (6% v 60%, P = .03) than those who were nonadherent. CONCLUSION: The study achieved primary feasibility objectives of retention and adherence to the study intervention. Weekly education about magnesium-rich diets was effective in increasing dietary magnesium intake. Adequate dietary magnesium appeared to be protective against hypomagnesemia.

Integrative Oncology Approaches to Reduce Recurrence of Disease and Improve Survival.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: After a cancer diagnosis, patients ask what they can do in addition to the recommended treatments to increase their survival. Many turn to integrative medicine modalities and lifestyle changes to improve their chances of survival. Numerous studies have demonstrated that lifestyle changes can significantly improve survival rates for cancer patients. Less support exists for the use of natural products or supplements to improve cancer survival. In this manuscript, we review key findings and evidence in the areas of healthy eating habits, physical activity, stress management and social support, and sleep quality, as well as natural products and supplements as they relate to the cancer recurrence and survival. RECENT FINDINGS: While more research is needed to fully understand the mechanisms underlying the associations between lifestyle changes and cancer survival, findings suggest that lifestyle modifications in the areas of diet, physical activity, stress management and social support, and sleep quality improve clinical cancer outcomes. This is especially true for programs that modify more than one lifestyle habit. To date, outside of supplementing with vitamin D to maintain adequate levels, conflicting conclusion within the research remain regarding the efficacy of using natural products or supplement to improve cancer recurrence of disease or cancer survival. A call for further research is warranted. Lifestyle screening and counseling should be incorporated into cancer treatment plans to help improve patient outcomes. While the scientific community strives for the pursuit of high-quality research on natural products to enhance cancer survival, transparency, dialogue, and psychological safety between patients and clinicians must continue to be emphasized. Proactive inquiry by clinicians regarding patients' supplement use will allow for an informed discussion of the benefits and risks of natural products and supplements, as well as a re-emphasis of the evidence supporting diet and other lifestyle habits to increase survival.

Addressing Patient Requests to Add Dietary Supplements to Their Cancer Care-A Suggested Approach.

Dietary supplements are widely utilized by cancer patients as part of a complementary and integrative approach to their healthcare. However, a significant portion of patients refrain from discussing their supplement use with their physicians, often due to the perceived indifference or negativity of their healthcare providers. This communication gap exposes patients to unreliable information sources and potential risks associated with uninformed supplementation. As the healthcare landscape evolves, there is an increasing recognition of the pivotal role that physicians play in guiding patients' healthcare decisions. A patient-centered perspective prioritizes the provision of evidence-based information tailored to the individual's needs. It advocates for open discussions about potential risks and fosters shared decision making, respecting patient autonomy. Additionally, this approach involves offering alternative options, documenting patient preferences, and ensuring ongoing support while coordinating with the healthcare team. To address these evolving needs, healthcare providers must adopt a transformative perspective, becoming expert guides who engage with their patients as informed and empowered participants. This revised approach emphasizes an open dialogue that balances presenting facts and acknowledging uncertainties surrounding dietary supplement use. Our narrative review of the literature underscores the importance of a practical approach, centered on transparent discussions and respect for patient autonomy. By following this approach, healthcare providers can empower patients to navigate the complexities of dietary supplement use within the context of cancer care, thereby safeguarding patient safety and overall well-being. Notably, our proposed tool highlights the utilization of reliable sources, the risk stratification of supplements, specific recommendations, and subsequent monitoring, providing a structured framework for informed decision making.

Randomized phase II trial of cetuximab, bevacizumab, and irinotecan compared with cetuximab and bevacizumab alone in irinotecan-refractory colorectal cancer: the BOND-2 study.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of concurrent administration of two monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab and bevacizumab, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a randomized phase II study in patients with irinotecan-refractory colorectal cancer. All patients were naïve to both bevacizumab and cetuximab. Patients in arm A received irinotecan at the same dose and schedule as last received before study entry, plus cetuximab 400 mg/m2 loading dose, then weekly cetuximab 250 mg/m2, plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg administered every other week. Patients in arm B received the same cetuximab and bevacizumab as those in arm A but without irinotecan. RESULTS: Forty-three patients received cetuximab, bevacizumab, and irinotecan (CBI) and 40 patients received cetuximab and bevacizumab alone (CB). Toxicities were as would have been expected from the single agents. For the CBI arm, time to tumor progression (TTP) was 7.3 months and the response rate was 37%; for the CB arm, TTP was 4.9 months and the response rate was 20%. The overall survival for the CBI arm was 14.5 months and the overall survival for the CB-alone arm was 11.4 months. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab and bevacizumab can be administered concurrently, with a toxicity pattern that seems to be similar to that which would be expected from the two agents alone. This combination plus irinotecan also seems to be feasible. The activity seen with the addition of bevacizumab to cetuximab, or to cetuximab plus irinotecan, seems to be favorable when compared with historical controls of cetuximab or cetuximab/irinotecan in patients who are naïve to bevacizumab.

Phase I trial of systemic oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy with hepatic arterial infusion in patients with unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of concurrent systemic oxaliplatin (Oxal) combinations plus hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) in patients with unresectable hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients (89% previously treated) with unresectable liver metastases were treated with concurrent HAI and systemic Oxal plus irinotecan (CPT-11; group A) or Oxal, fluorouracil (FU), and leucovorin (LV; group B). Systemic chemotherapy was administered every 2 weeks concurrent with 2 weeks of HAI floxuridine (FUDR) and dexamethasone (Dex) every 28 days. RESULTS: The MTD for patients in group A was Oxal 100 mg/m(2), CPT-11 150 mg/m(2), and FUDR 0.12 mg/kg x 30 mL divided by pump flow rate. The MTD for group B was Oxal 100 mg/m(2), LV 400 mg/m(2), and FU 1,400 mg/m(2) by continuous infusion over 48 hours, with the same FUDR dose as in group A. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities in groups A and B included diarrhea (24% and 20%), neutropenia (10% and 7%), neurotoxicity (24% and 20%), and bilirubin more than 3 mg/mL (5% and 7%, respectively). The complete and partial response rate totaled 90% for group A and 87% for group B. Median survival time was 36 and 22 months for groups A and B, respectively. Seven patients in group A were ultimately able to undergo liver resection. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy with HAI FUDR and Dex plus systemic Oxal combinations may be safely administered to patients with colorectal cancer. The high response rate (88%) and the possibility of conversion to resectability, despite disease progression on prior systemic regimens, suggest that these combinations should be evaluated in larger studies as first- or second-line therapy in patients with hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer.