Interleukin-1 genetic polymorphisms and their relationship to the cancer anorexia/weight loss syndrome in metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

Interleukin-1 (IL-1) beta is a putative mediator of the cancer anorexia/weight loss syndrome, and certain polymorphisms of its gene are thought to be associated with a greater risk of gastric cancer. Do these IL-1 beta genetic polymorphisms predispose patients with gastric and gastroesophageal cancer to the anorexia/weight loss syndrome? This study focused on 44 patients with metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal cancer. All underwent genotyping, completed serial quality-of-life questionnaires germane to appetite, and underwent meticulous serial follow-up. Patients with the IL-1 beta-31 C/T and T/T genotypes were more likely to describe a worse appetite at baseline than were those with the C/C genotype. In addition, patients with the IL-1 beta+3954 C/T and T/T genotypes showed greater improvements in their weight (P = 0.02) and in survival (hazard ratio, 0.3; P = 0.04) over time than did patients with the C/C genotype. These associations occurred independently of tumor response. These preliminary data suggest that certain interleukin-1 beta genetic polymorphisms may modulate the cancer anorexia/weight loss syndrome in patients with metastatic gastric and esophageal cancer. Confirmatory studies are warranted.

Phase II/III study of doxorubicin with fluorouracil compared with streptozocin with fluorouracil or dacarbazine in the treatment of advanced carcinoid tumors: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E1281.

PURPOSE: Optimal treatments for metastatic carcinoid tumor remain undefined, and the role of chemotherapy for symptomatic patients with progressive disease is uncertain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred forty-nine patients with advanced carcinoid tumors were randomized to either doxorubicin with fluorouracil (FU/DOX) or streptozocin with fluorouracil (FU/STZ). Patients crossed over to the dacarbazine (DTIC) treatment after disease progression following first-line treatment (either FU/DOX or FU/STZ), and 73 patients were assigned to one of these three treatments based on their previous treatment or on abnormal baseline cardiac or renal function. RESULTS: In the randomized group, there was no difference between FU/DOX and FU/STZ in response rates (15.9% v 16%) and progression-free survival (4.5 v 5.3 months). FU/STZ (24.3 months) was superior to FU/DOX (15.7 months; P = .0267) in median survival. The response rate of crossover DTIC treatment was 8.2%, with a median survival of 11.9 months. Hematologic toxicities were the major treatment-related toxicities for both FU/DOX and FU/STZ, and mild to moderate renal toxicity was reported in 40 (34.8%) of 115 patients in the FU/STZ arm. CONCLUSION: Response to all three treatment regimens were modest. FU/STZ improved survival compared with the doxorubicin-based regimen, suggesting that the combination should be considered to be an active regimen of therapy when chemotherapy is judged to be an option for selected patients with carcinoid tumors.

Phase III, randomized, double-blind study of epoetin alfa compared with placebo in anemic patients receiving chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To determine whether weekly epoetin alfa could improve hemoglobin (HgB) levels, reduce RBC transfusions, and improve quality of life (QOL) in patients with advanced cancer and with anemia after receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomly assigned patients to placebo or epoetin alfa (Ortho Biotech, Bridgewater, NJ) 40,000 U subcutaneous weekly for 16 weeks. QOL, HgB, and RBC transfusions were measured pretreatment and monthly. RESULTS: The study accrued 344 patients; 330 were assessable for efficacy and 305 were assessable for QOL. Placebo-treated patients had a mean increase in HgB of 0.9 g/dL (range, -3.8 to +5.3) compared with 2.8 g/dL (range, -2.2 to +7.5) for epoetin-treated patients (P < .0001). During the study, 31.7% of placebo-treated patients achieved a > or = 2 g/dL HgB increase compared with 72.7% of epoetin-treated patients (P < .0001). The incidence of RBC transfusion for placebo and epoetin treatment arms was 39.6% and 25.3% (P = .005), respectively. The placebo group received 256 units of RBCs compared with 127 units in the epoetin group (P < .0001). The incidence of toxicity in the groups was similar. Changes in the average QOL scores from baseline to the end of the study were similar in the two groups (P = not significant). The HgB responders (irrespective of treatment arm) had a mean change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) fatigue score from a baseline of +5.1 compared with -2.1 for the nonresponders (P = .006). CONCLUSION: Epoetin alfa significantly improved HgB and reduced transfusions in this patient population. These results support the use of weekly epoetin alfa as an ameliorative agent for cancer-related anemia.

The outcome of combined-modality therapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer in the elderly.

PURPOSE: The North Central Cancer Treatment Group performed a phase III trial to determine whether chemotherapy plus either bid radiation therapy (RT) or daily (qd) RT resulted in a better outcome for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). No difference in survival was identified between the two arms. This secondary analysis was performed to examine the relationship between patient age and outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred forty-six patients were randomized to receive etoposide plus cisplatin and either RT qd or split-course RT bid. This retrospective study compared the outcomes of patients aged >/=70 years ("elderly patients") with those of younger individuals. Of the 244 assessable patients, 63 (26%) were elderly, and 181 (74%) were younger individuals. RESULTS: The 2-year and 5-year survival rates were 39% and 18%, respectively, in patients younger than 70 years, compared with 36% and 13%, respectively, in elderly patients (P =.4). Grade 4+ toxicity occurred in 62% of patients younger than 70 years compared with 81% of elderly patients (P =.007). Grade 4+ hematologic toxicity occurred in 56% of patients younger than 70 years, compared with 78% of elderly patients (P =.003). Grade 4+ pneumonitis occurred in 1% of those younger than 70 years, compared with 6% of elderly patients (P =.02). CONCLUSION: Toxicity, especially myelosuppression and pneumonitis, was more pronounced in the elderly patients receiving combined-modality therapy for locally advanced NSCLC. Despite increased toxicity, elderly patients have survival rates equivalent to younger individuals. Therefore, fit, elderly patients with locally advanced NSCLC should be encouraged to receive combined-modality therapy, preferably on clinical trials with cautious, judicious monitoring. Future studies should explore ways to decrease toxicity of therapy in elderly patients.

Phase III evaluation of fluoxetine for treatment of hot flashes.

PURPOSE: Hot flashes can be a prominent problem in women with a history of breast cancer. Given concerns regarding the use of hormonal therapies in such patients, other nonhormonal means for treating hot flashes are required. Based on anecdotal information regarding the efficacy of fluoxetine and other newer antidepressants for treating hot flashes, the present trial was developed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This trial used a double-blinded, randomized, two-period (4 weeks per period), cross-over methodology to study the efficacy of fluoxetine (20 mg/d) for treating hot flashes in women with a history of breast cancer or a concern regarding the use of estrogen (because of breast cancer risk). Eligible patients had to have reported that they averaged at least 14 hot flashes per week; they could have received tamoxifen or raloxifene as long as they were on a stable dose. The major outcome measure was a bivariate construct representing hot flash frequency and hot flash score, analyzed by a classic sums and differences cross-over analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-one randomized women began protocol therapy. By the end of the first treatment period, hot flash scores (frequency x average severity) decreased 50% in the fluoxetine arm versus 36% in the placebo arm. Cross-over analysis demonstrated a significantly greater marked hot flash score improvement with fluoxetine than placebo (P =.02). The results were not adjusted for potential confounding influences, including age and tamoxifen use. The fluoxetine was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This dose of fluoxetine resulted in a modest improvement in hot flashes.

Randomized phase II study of two irinotecan schedules for patients with metastatic breast cancer refractory to an anthracycline, a taxane, or both.

PURPOSE: A pressing need exists for agents active against anthracycline- or taxane-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC), or both. Previous clinical trials suggested that irinotecan might have such activity. We conducted this multicenter phase II study to assess efficacy and tolerability of two irinotecan schedules. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MBC patients who experienced disease progression after one to three chemotherapy regimens, including at least one anthracycline- or taxane-based regimen, were randomly assigned to irinotecan in 6-week cycles comprising 100 mg/m(2) weekly for 4 weeks, then a 2-week rest (weekly) or 240 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The weekly arm had 52 assessable patients; the every-3-weeks arm had 51 assessable patients. In the weekly arm, the objective response (complete regression [CR] + partial regression [PR]) rate was 23% (one CR, 11 PR; 95% CI, 13% to 37%). Median response duration was 4.9 months (range, 1.9 to 15.9 months), and median overall survival was 9.7 months (95% CI, 8.0 to 14.2 months). In the every-3-weeks arm, the objective response rate was 14% (nine PR; 95% CI, 6% to 26%), median response duration was 4.2 months (range, 3.1 to 13.9 months), and median overall survival was 8.6 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 12.3 months). Treatment generally was well tolerated, especially in the weekly arm. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events with > or = 10% incidence included neutropenia (29%) and diarrhea (17%) in the weekly arm and neutropenia (36%), vomiting (20%), dyspnea (18%), nausea (16%), and diarrhea (12%) in the every-3-weeks arm. CONCLUSION: Irinotecan is active with good tolerability in refractory MBC. Irinotecan (especially weekly) warrants additional study as monotherapy and in combination regimens in this setting.

Phase III study of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy compared with chemotherapy alone in the surgical adjuvant treatment of colon cancer: results of intergroup protocol 0130.

PURPOSE: Some patients with colon cancer have a high risk of local recurrence postoperatively. This trial was undertaken to determine whether radiation therapy added to an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen improves outcome in high-risk patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resected colon cancer with tumor adherence or invasion of surrounding structures, or with T3N1 or T3N2 tumors of the ascending or descending colon were randomly assigned to receive fluorouracil and levamisole therapy with or without radiation therapy. Patients who received chemotherapy and radiation therapy (chemoRT) received 45 to 50.4 Gy in 25 to 28 fractions beginning 28 days after starting chemotherapy. Patient enrollment was terminated because of slow accrual after 222 patients enrolled (original goal was 700 patients); 187 patients were assessable. RESULTS: Overall 5-year survival was 62% for chemotherapy patients and 58% for chemoRT patients (P >.50); 5-year disease-free survival was 51% for both groups (P >.50). Toxicity (>/= grade 3) occurred in 42% of chemotherapy patients and 54% of chemoRT patients (P =.04). Leukopenia (>/= grade 3) occurred in 10% of chemotherapy patients and 22% of chemoRT patients (P =.02). No significant difference in nonhematologic toxicity (>/= grade 3) was observed between chemoRT and chemotherapy patients (35% v 44%; P =.26). CONCLUSION: Patients who received chemotherapy or chemoRT had similar overall survival and disease-free survival. Toxicity was higher among chemoRT patients. These results must be interpreted with caution because of the high number of ineligible patients and the limited power of the study to detect potentially meaningful differences.

An eicosapentaenoic acid supplement versus megestrol acetate versus both for patients with cancer-associated wasting: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group and National Cancer Institute of Canada collaborative effort.

PURPOSE: Studies suggest eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), an omega-3 fatty acid, augments weight, appetite, and survival in cancer-associated wasting. This study determined whether an EPA supplement-administered alone or with megestrol acetate (MA)-was more effective than MA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred twenty-one assessable patients with cancer-associated wasting were randomly assigned to an EPA supplement 1.09 g administered bid plus placebo; MA liquid suspension 600 mg/d plus an isocaloric, isonitrogenous supplement administered twice a day; or both. Eligible patients reported a 5-lb, 2-month weight loss and/or intake of less than 20 calories/kg/d. RESULTS: A smaller percentage taking the EPA supplement gained >or= 10% of baseline weight compared with those taking MA: 6% v 18%, respectively (P =.004). Combination therapy resulted in weight gain of >or= 10% in 11% of patients (P =.17 across all arms). The percentage of patients with appetite improvement (North Central Cancer Treatment Group Questionnaire) was not statistically different: 63%, 69%, and 66%, in EPA-, MA-, and combination-treated arms, respectively (P =.69). In contrast, 4-week Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy scores suggested MA-containing arms experienced superior appetite stimulation compared with the EPA arm, with scores of 40, 55, and 55 in EPA-, MA-, and combination-treated arms, respectively (P =.004). Survival was not significantly different among arms. Global quality of life was not significantly different among groups. With the exception of increased impotence in MA-treated patients, toxicity was comparable. CONCLUSION: This EPA supplement, either alone or in combination with MA, does not improve weight or appetite better than MA alone.

Dronabinol versus megestrol acetate versus combination therapy for cancer-associated anorexia: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group study.

PURPOSE: To determine whether dronabinol administered alone or with megestrol acetate was more, less, or equal in efficacy to single-agent megestrol acetate for palliating cancer-associated anorexia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred sixty-nine assessable advanced cancer patients were randomized to (1) oral megestrol acetate 800 mg/d liquid suspension plus placebo, (2) oral dronabinol 2.5 mg twice a day plus placebo, or (3) both agents. Eligible patients acknowledged that loss of appetite or weight was a problem and reported the loss of 5 pounds or more during 2 months and/or a daily intake of less than 20 calories/kg of body weight. RESULTS: Groups were comparable at baseline in age, sex, tumor type, weight loss, and performance status. A greater percentage of megestrol acetate-treated patients reported appetite improvement and weight gain compared with dronabinol-treated patients: 75% versus 49% (P =.0001) for appetite and 11% versus 3% (P =.02) for > or = 10% baseline weight gain. Combination treatment resulted in no significant differences in appetite or weight compared with megestrol acetate alone. The Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy questionnaire, which emphasizes anorexia-related questions, demonstrated an improvement in quality of life (QOL) among megestrol acetate-treated and combination-treated patients. The single-item Uniscale, a global QOL instrument, found comparable scores. Toxicity was also comparable, with the exception of an increased incidence of impotence among men who received megestrol acetate. CONCLUSION: In the doses and schedules we studied, megestrol acetate provided superior anorexia palliation among advanced cancer patients compared with dronabinol alone. Combination therapy did not appear to confer additional benefit.

Efficacy and quality-of-life data are related in a phase II trial of oral chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate quality of life (QOL) and tumor response after administration of an oral chemotherapy regimen in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight patients received a mean number of 5.8 cycles of therapy. QOL data were analyzed at baseline, after every two cycles of therapy, and at the time of treatment discontinuation. The Uniscale and the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 were both utilized. RESULTS: The confirmed response rate was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17% to 37%). Median survival was 11.3 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 15.1 months). Global QOL scores were unchanged over the course of therapy by either tool. Only the physical function subscale score had worsened at the end of therapy. In an analysis of responding patients, significant and durable improvements in both global QOL measures as well as select subscale scores were observed. Diarrhea and physical function QOL scores had declined at the time of treatment discontinuation. Patients who did not respond to therapy had preserved QOL scores when they were evaluated after two cycles of therapy. CONCLUSION: This oral treatment strategy preserved QOL in treated patients. Global QOL measures as well as several QOL subscale scores significantly improved in patients with a documented response to therapy. The profile of improved QOL components indicated that patient well-being was related to tumor response in specific and perceivable ways. Nonresponding patients reported preserved QOL during the first two cycles of therapy. QOL analysis was feasible and informative in this moderately sized multicenter phase II trial.

Two concurrent phase II trials of paclitaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab (weekly or every-3-week schedule) as first-line therapy in women with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer: NCCTG study 983252.

PURPOSE: The efficacy and tolerability of 2 different schedules of paclitaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab for HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (MBC) were evaluated in this parallel multicenter phase II trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received every-3-week therapy (n = 43) consisting of a 200 mg/m(2) dose of paclitaxel/carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) of 6 mg/mL per minute and trastuzumab (an initial 8 mg/kg dose and subsequent 6 mg/kg doses) administered every 21 days for 8 cycles or weekly therapy (n = 48) consisting of an 80-mg/m(2) dose of paclitaxel/carboplatin AUC of 2 mg/mL per minute for 3 of 4 weeks, with weekly trastuzumab (an initial 4-mg/kg dose and subsequent 2-mg/kg doses) administered every 4 weeks for 6 cycles. Trastuzumab was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. HER2 status was confirmed by a central laboratory review. RESULTS: The overall response rate (ORR) with every-3-week therapy was 65% (90% confidence interval [CI], 51%-77%), with a median time to disease progression of 9.9 months and median overall survival (OS) time of 2.3 years. The ORR with weekly therapy was 81% (90% CI, 70%-90%), with a median time to disease progression of 13.8 months and a median OS time of 3.2 years. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities occurred significantly less frequently with weekly therapy versus every-3-week therapy: grade 3/4 neutropenia (52% vs. 88%); grade 3 thrombocytopenia (4% vs. 30%); and grade 3 neurosensory toxicity (2% vs. 19%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Every-3-week and weekly regimens of paclitaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab are highly active in women with HER2-overexpressing MBC. However, fewer patients developed severe neutropenia, leukopenia, or thrombocytopenia with the weekly schedule.

Phase III trial comparing chemotherapy plus once-daily or twice-daily radiotherapy in Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: This Phase III study was performed to determine whether chemotherapy plus b.i.d. or q.d. radiotherapy (RT) resulted in superior survival for patients with Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with Stage III NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of

Long-term results of a phase III trial comparing once-daily radiotherapy with twice-daily radiotherapy in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: This Phase III study was performed to determine whether twice-daily (b.i.d.) radiotherapy (RT) resulted in better survival than once-daily (q.d.) RT for patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 310 patients with LD-SCLC initially received three cycles of etoposide and cisplatin. Subsequently, the 261 patients without significant progression were randomized to two cycles of etoposide and cisplatin plus either q.d. RT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) or split-course b.i.d. RT (24 Gy in 16 fractions, a 2.5-week break, and 24 Gy in 16 fractions) to the chest. Patients then received a sixth cycle of etoposide and cisplatin followed by prophylactic cranial RT. RESULTS: Follow-up ranged from 4.6 to 11.9 years (median, 7.4 years). The median survival and 5-year survival rate from randomization was 20.6 months and 21% for patients who received q.d. RT compared with 20.6 months and 22% for those who received b.i.d. RT (p = 0.68), respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in the rates of progression (p = 0.68), intrathoracic failure (p = 0.45), in-field failure (p = 0.62), or distant failure (p = 0.82) between the two treatment arms. No statistically significant difference was found in the overall rate of Grade 3 or worse (p = 0.83) or Grade 4 or worse toxicity (p = 0.95). Grade 3 or worse esophagitis (p = 0.05) was more common in the b.i.d. arm. Grade 5 toxicity occurred in 4 (3%) of 130 patients who received b.i.d. RT compared with 0 (0%) of 131 who received q.d. RT (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Although this study did not demonstrate an advantage to split-course b.i.d. RT, the long-term survival was favorable, likely reflecting the positive influences of concurrent combined modality therapy and prophylactic cranial RT.

Randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III surgical adjuvant clinical trial of megestrol acetate (Megace) in selected patients with malignant melanoma.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial was performed to assess megestrol acetate (Megace) as a postsurgical adjuvant therapy for patients with locally advanced malignant melanoma. Patients whose tumors were greater than 1.7 mm thick and had no regional lymph node involvement and patients with regional lymph node involvement were randomized to receive either 160 mg twice per day oral suspension of megestrol acetate or placebo. Treatment was administered for a maximum of 2 years or until disease progression. The study accrued 262 eligible patients. All but two patients were followed until death or a minimum of 4.5 years. Disease progression was documented in 156 patients. Neither progression-free survival (PFS) nor overall survival (OS) was found to differ between the treatments. The median PFS was 2.4 years in the megestrol acetate arm and 2.3 years in the placebo arm. Multivariate analysis revealed a significantly decreased PFS for patients with four or more positive regional lymph nodes and metachronous nodal disease. Median OS was 5.3 years in the megestrol acetate arm and 3.9 years in the placebo arm. Multivariate analysis revealed that OS was significantly decreased for patients 70 years of age or older with four or more positive lymph nodes. Adjuvant therapy with megestrol acetate oral suspension administered at a dose of 160 mg twice a day for 2 years was not found to be effective in prolonging PFS or OS in patients with surgically resected, locally advanced melanoma.

A phase II trial of docetaxel and CPT-11 in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric cardia.

PURPOSE: The incidence of adenocarcinoma of the lower third of the esophagus, esophagogastric junction, and gastric cardia has been rising in the face of limited treatment options for patients with metastatic disease. With the emergence of data to suggest that single agent docetaxel and irinotecan carry antineoplastic effects in this setting, we determined the response rate of these agents when given in combination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-six patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the lower third of the esophagus, esophagogastric junction, and gastric cardia were evaluated. Patients received docetaxel 50 mg/m2/d and irinotecan 130 mg/m2/d intravenously at 21-d intervals with a tumor assessment after 2 cycles. Because of unacceptable toxicity among the first 13 patients, dosing was reduced to docetaxel 40 mg/m2/d and irinotecan 100 mg/m2/d intravenously at 21-d intervals. RESULTS: The response rate for the entire cohort was 26% (95% confidence interval: 14%, 41%) with 12 confirmed partial responses. Five of these 12 responses were observed in patients treated at the higher chemotherapy dose. However, because 8 of 13 patients suffered grade 4 neutropenia and fevers, a dose reduction was incorporated into the protocol, and the remainder of the cohort was treated at the lower dose. All except 4 of the 15 observed grade 4 toxicities occurred at the higher dose, and these toxicities included nausea and vomiting, dyspnea, hypotension, dysrhythmias, and diarrhea in addition to neutropenia and fevers. There were no grade 5 toxicities. The median survival for the entire cohort was 7.3 mo. CONCLUSION: The combination of docetaxel and irinotecan provides modest antineoplastic activity among patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, esophagogastric junction, and gastric cardia. Doses of docetaxel 40 mg/m2/d and irinotecan 100 mg/m2/d at 21-d intervals provide an acceptable safety profile, but higher doses appear to result in unacceptable toxicity.

Phase II NCCTG trial of oral topotecan and paclitaxel with G-CSF (filgrastim) support in patients with previously untreated extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and toxicity of oral topotecan and paclitaxel in untreated patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients received 1.75 mg/m2 of oral topotecan days 1 to 5 and 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel IV over 3 hours on day 5 (after topotecan) every 4 weeks for 6 cycles. Subcutaneous G-CSF at a dose of 5 microg/kg was then given 24 to 48 hours after the last dose of chemotherapy and daily for 10 days. RESULTS: All 38 patients were available for toxicity and response analysis. A median of 5 treatment cycles was given, with a range of 1 to 7 cycles. Seventeen (45%) patients received at least 6 cycles of treatment. The most common severe adverse events were neutropenia (42.1%), leukopenia (34.2%), thrombocytopenia (18.4%), nausea (18.4%), diarrhea (13.2%), and fatigue (13.2%). Two grade 5 treatment-related evens were seen. The median overall survival was 9.1 month (95% CI: 7.5-13.0 months), with a 1-year survival estimate of 44.7% (95% CI: 31.4-63.7%) and a 2-year survival rate of 5.3% (95% CI: 1.4-20.3%). The median time to progression was 5.0 months (95% CI: 3.8-6.6 months), with a 1-year progression-free rate of 5.8% (95% CI: 1.5-22.2%) and a 2-year progression-free rate of 2.9% (95% CI: 0.4-19.9%). The estimated confirmed response rate was 52.9%. CONCLUSION: This regimen has shown similar antitumor activity to that achieved with standard therapy. Because of unacceptable toxicity and cost, we do not recommend this regimen in a palliative setting.

Impact of pretreatment factors on adverse events: a pooled analysis of North Central Cancer Treatment Group advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer trials.

INTRODUCTION: This pooled analysis was performed to examine the impact of pretreatment factors on severe (grade 3 or higher) adverse events (AE) in patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A pooled data set of 1053 participants from nine North Central Cancer Treatment Group clinical trials was used. Age, gender, performance status, tumor stage, body mass index, serum creatinine levels, hemoglobin levels, white blood cell counts, and platelet counts were evaluated univariately and multivariately using logistic regression. The magnitude of the effects of the pretreatment factors after adjusting for type of chemotherapy agent (platinum versus no platinum) was explored in the final multivariate model. RESULTS: Women and older participants had a significantly greater risk for experiencing severe hematologic and non-hematologic AE. Participants with performance status >0 had an increased risk for severe non-hematologic AE. For every one unit (10/L) increase in pretreatment white blood cell count, there was an 11% reduction in the odds of experiencing a severe hematologic AE. The magnitude of these effects on the end points remained similar after adjusting for type of chemotherapy agent. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment factors of gender, age, performance status, and hematologic parameters were significant predictors of severe AE among patients with advanced stage NSCLC. This suggests the need to control or adjust for factors that predispose patients to an increased risk of severe AE. These findings can aid in tailoring therapy to individual patients and in the proper design of future clinical trials.

A prognostic model for advanced stage nonsmall cell lung cancer. Pooled analysis of North Central Cancer Treatment Group trials.

BACKGROUND: A pooled analysis was performed to examine the impact of pretreatment factors on overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) in patients with advanced-stage nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to construct a prediction equation for OS using pretreatment factors. METHODS: A pooled data set of 1053 patients from 9 North Central Cancer Treatment Group trials was used. Age, gender, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS), tumor stage (Stage IIIB vs. Stage IV), body mass index (BMI), creatinine level, hemoglobin (Hgb) level, white blood cell (WBC) count, and platelet count were evaluated for their prognostic significance in both univariate and multivariate analyses by using a Cox proportional-hazards model. RESULTS: Patients who had high WBC counts, low Hgb levels, PS >0, BMI < 18.5 kg/m2, and TNM Stage IV disease had significantly worse TTP and OS. Patients who had Stage IV disease with a high WBC count had a particularly poor prognosis. An equation to predict the OS of patients with Stage IV NSCLC based on pretreatment PS, BMI, Hgb level, and WBC count was constructed. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the widely accepted prognostic factors of PS, BMI, and disease stage, both of the readily available laboratory parameters of Hgb level and WBC count were found to be significant prognostic factors for OS and TTP in patients with advanced-stage NSCLC. The authors' prediction equation can be used to evaluate the benefit of a treatment in Phase II trials by comparing the observed survival of a cohort with its expected survival by using the patients' own prognostic factors in place of comparisons with historic data that may have substantially different baseline patient characteristics.

Randomized trial of tamoxifen alone or combined with fluoxymesterone as adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with resected estrogen receptor positive breast cancer. North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial 89-30-52.

PURPOSE: This clinical trial evaluated the addition of fluoxymesterone (Flu) to tamoxifen (Tam) in women with resected early stage breast cancer and attempted to corroborate the findings of superiority for the combination over Tam alone seen in a previous randomized trial in metastatic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer that was known to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive were randomized to treatment with Tam (20 mg per day orally for 5 years) alone or combined with Flu (10 mg orally twice per day for 1 year). The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS) defined as local-regional or distant recurrence including ductal carcinoma in situ of the ipsilateral, but not contralateral breast, and death from any cause. RESULTS: There were 541 eligible patients entered between 1991 and 1995 and the treatment arms were balanced with respect to patient characteristics. The median follow up of patients still alive was 11.4 years. No significant difference was found between Tam plus Flu and Tam alone in terms of RFS or overall survival. The adjusted hazard ratio (Tam+Flu/Tam) for relapse or death without relapse was estimated to be 0.84 (95% CI: 0.64-1.10) and that for death was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.67-1.18). As expected there was more virilization in women who received Flu. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical trial did not demonstrate superiority of Tam plus Flu over Tam alone as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with resected early breast cancer known to be ER positive.

Phase III comparison of depomedroxyprogesterone acetate to venlafaxine for managing hot flashes: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial N99C7.

PURPOSE: Vasomotor hot flashes are a common problem in menopausal women. Given concerns regarding estrogen and/or combined hormonal therapy, other treatment options are desired. Prior trials have confirmed that progestational agents and newer antidepressants effectively reduce hot flashes. This current trial compared a single intramuscular dose of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), depot preparation, versus daily oral venlafaxine as treatment for hot flashes. METHODS: Women with bothersome hot flashes were entered onto this trial, were randomly assigned to treatment, and then had a baseline week where hot flash scores were recorded without treatment. They were then treated and observed for 6 weeks; daily diaries were used to measure hot flash frequencies and severities. There were 109 patients per each arm randomly assigned to receive MPA 400 mg intramuscularly for a single dose versus venlafaxine 37.5 mg per day for a week, then 75 mg per day. RESULTS: During the sixth week after random assignment, hot flash scores were reduced by 55% in the venlafaxine arm versus 79% in the MPA arm (P < .0001). In an intention-to-treat analysis, 46% of venlafaxine patients (50 of 109) compared with 74% of the MPA patients (81 of 109) had a decrease in hot flashes by more than 50% from baseline (P < .0001). Less toxicity was reported in the MPA arm. CONCLUSION: A single MPA dose seems to be well tolerated and more effectively reduces hot flashes than does venlafaxine.