Randomized controlled trial of an educational intervention for managing fatigue in women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of a psychoeducational intervention in improving cancer-related fatigue. Patients and Methods This randomized controlled trial involved 109 women commencing adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I or II breast cancer in five chemotherapy treatment centers. Intervention group patients received an individualized fatigue education and support program delivered in the clinic and by phone over three 10- to 20-minute sessions 1 week apart. Instruments included a numeric rating scale assessing confidence with managing fatigue; 11-point numeric rating scales measuring fatigue at worst, average, and best; the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue and Piper Fatigue Scales; the Cancer Self-Efficacy Scale; the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30; and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. For each outcome, separate analyses of covariance of change scores between baseline (T1) and the three follow-up time points (T2, T3, and T4) were conducted, controlling for the variable's corresponding baseline value. Results Compared with the intervention group, mean difference scores between the baseline (T1) and immediate after the test (T2) assessments increased significantly more for the control group for worst and average fatigue, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue, and Piper fatigue severity and interference measures. These differences were not observed between baseline and T3 and T4 assessments. No significant differences were identified for any pre- or post-test change scores for confidence with managing fatigue, cancer self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, or quality of life. Conclusion Preparatory education and support has the potential to assist women to cope with cancer-related fatigue in the short term. However, further research is needed to identify ways to improve the potency and sustainability of psychoeducational interventions for managing cancer-related fatigue.

Late cardiac effects of chemotherapy in breast cancer survivors treated with adjuvant doxorubicin: 10-year follow-up

Doxorubicin (Dox), a mainstay of adjuvant breast cancer treatment, is associated with cardiac toxicity in the form of left ventricular dysfunction (LVD), LV diastolic dysfunction, or LV systolic dysfunction. Study objectives were to evaluate the prevalence of LVD in long-term breast cancer survivors treated with Dox and determine if brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) may help identify patients at risk for LVD. Patients who participated in prospective clinical trials of adjuvant Dox-based chemotherapy for breast cancer with a baseline left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction evaluation from 1999 to 2006 were retrospectively identified from the St Vincent's University Hospital database. Patients were invited to undergo transthoracic echocardiography, BNP analysis, and cardiovascular (CV) risk factor assessment. LVDD was defined as left atrial volume index >34 mL/m(2) and/or lateral wall E prime <10 m/s, and LVSD as LVEF <50 %. Of 212 patients identified, 154 participated, 19 patients had died (no cardiac deaths), and 39 declined. Mean age was 60.7 [55:67] years. A majority of the patients (128, 83 %) had low CV risk (0/1 risk factors), 21 (13.6 %) had 2 RFs, and 5 (3.2 %) ≥3 RFs. BMI was 27.2 ± 4.9 kg/m(2). Median Dox dose was 240 mg/m(2) [225-298]; 92 patients (59.7 %) received ≤240 mg/m(2) and 62 (40.3 %) > 240 mg/m(2). Baseline LVEF was 68.2 ± 8 %. At follow-up of 10.8 ± 2.2 years, LVEF was 64.4 ± 6 %. Three (1.9 %) subjects had LVEF <50 % and one (0.7 %) had LVDD. Dox >240 mg/m2 was associated with any LVEF drop. BNP levels at follow-up were 20.3 pg/ml [9.9-36.5] and 21.1 pg/ml [9.8-37.7] in those without LVD and 61.5 pg/ml [50-68.4] in those with LVD (p = 0.04). Long-term prospective data describing the impact of Dox on cardiotoxicity are sparse. At over 10 years of follow-up, decreases in LVEF are common, and dose related, but LVD as defined is infrequent (2.6 %). Monitoring with BNP for subclinical LVD needs further evaluation.

Has the time come for genomic tests to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in node-positive breast cancer?

SCOPUS: ed.j

Randomised controlled trial of a supervised exercise rehabilitation program for colorectal cancer survivors immediately after chemotherapy: study protocol

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and the ensuing treatments can have a substantial impact on the physical and psychological health of survivors. As the number of CRC survivors increases, so too does the need to develop viable rehabilitation programs to help these survivors return to good health as quickly as possible. Exercise has the potential to address many of the adverse effects of CRC treatment; however, to date, the role of exercise in the rehabilitation of cancer patients immediately after the completion of treatment has received limited research attention. This paper presents the design of a randomised controlled trial which will evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of a 12-week supervised aerobic exercise program (ImPACT Program) on the physiological and psychological markers of rehabilitation, in addition to biomarkers of standard haematological outcomes and the IGF axis. Methods/Design Forty CRC patients will be recruited through oncology clinics and randomised to an exercise group or a usual care control group. Baseline assessment will take place within 4 weeks of the patient completing adjuvant chemotherapy treatment. The exercise program for patients in the intervention group will commence a week after the baseline assessment. The program consists of three supervised moderate-intensity aerobic exercise sessions per week for 12 weeks. All participants will have assessments at baseline (0 wks), mid-intervention (6 wks), post-intervention (12 wks) and at a 6-week follow-up (18 wks). Outcome measures include cardio-respiratory fitness, biomarkers associated with health and survival, and indices of fatigue and quality of life. Process measures are participants' acceptability of, adherence to, and compliance with the exercise program, in addition to the safety of the program. Discussion The results of this study will provide valuable insight into the role of supervised exercise in improving life after CRC. Additionally, process analyses will inform the feasibility of implementing the program in a population of CRC patients immediately after completing chemotherapy.

An exercise intervention for women undergoing chemotherapy for ovarian cancer : feasibility and preliminary outcomes

Exercise interventions during adjuvant cancer treatment have been shown to increase functional capacity, relieve fatigue and distress and in one recent study, assist chemotherapy completion. These studies have been limited to breast, prostate or mixed cancer groups and it is not yet known if a similar intervention is even feasible among women diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Women undergoing treatment for ovarian cancer commonly have extensive pelvic surgery followed by high intensity chemotherapy. It is hypothesized that women with ovarian cancer may benefit most from a customised exercise intervention during chemotherapy treatment. This could reduce the number and severity of chemotherapy-related side-effects and optimize treatment adherence. Hence, the aim of the research was to assess feasibility and acceptability of a walking intervention in women with ovarian cancer whilst undergoing chemotherapy, as well as pre-post intervention changes in a range of physical and psychological outcomes. Newly diagnosed women with ovarian cancer were recruited from the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital (RBWH), to participate in a walking program throughout chemotherapy. The study used a one group pre- post-intervention test design. Baseline (conducted following surgery but prior to the first or second chemotherapy cycles) and follow-up (conducted three weeks after the last chemotherapy dose was received) assessments were performed. To accommodate changes in side-effects associated with treatment, specific weekly walking targets with respect to frequency, intensity and duration, were individualised for each participant. To assess feasibility, adherence and compliance with prescribed walking sessions, withdrawals and adverse events were recorded. Physical and psychological outcomes assessed included functional capacity, body composition, anxiety and depression, symptoms experienced during treatment and quality of life. Chemotherapy completion data was also documented and self-reported program helpfulness was assessed using a questionnaire post intervention. Forty-two women were invited to participate. Nine women were recruited, all of whom completed the program. There were no adverse events associated with participating in the intervention and all women reported that the walking program was helpful during their neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy treatment. Adherence and compliance to the walking prescription was high. On average, women achieved at least two of their three individual weekly prescription targets 83% of the time (range 42% to 94%). Positive changes were found in functional capacity and quality of life, in addition to reductions in the number and intensity of treatment-associated symptoms over the course of the intervention period. Functional capacity increased for all nine women from baseline to follow-up assessment, with improvements ranging from 10% to 51%. Quality of life improvements were also noted, especially in the physical well-being scale (baseline: median 18; follow-up: median 23). Treatment symptoms reduced in presence and severity, specifically, in constipation, pain and fatigue, post intervention. These positive yet preliminary results suggest that a walking intervention for women receiving chemotherapy for ovarian cancer is safe, feasible and acceptable. Importantly, women perceived the program to be helpful and rewarding, despite being conducted during a time typically associated with elevated distress and treatment symptoms that are often severe enough to alter or cease chemotherapy prescription.

Safety, feasibility and effects of an individualised walking intervention for women undergoing chemotherapy for ovarian cancer : a pilot study

Background: Exercise interventions during adjuvant cancer therapy have been shown to increase functional capacity, relieve fatigue and distress and may assist rates of chemotherapy completion. These studies have been limited to breast, gastric and mixed cancer groups and it is not yet known if a similar intervention is even feasible among women with ovarian cancer. We aimed to assess safety, feasibility and potential effect of a walking intervention in women undergoing chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. Methods: Women newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer were recruited to participate in an individualised walking intervention throughout chemotherapy and were assessed pre-and post-intervention. Feasibility measures included session adherence, compliance with exercise physiologist prescribed walking targets and self-reported program acceptability. Changes in objective physical functioning (6 minute walk test), self-reported distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), symptoms (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale - Physical) and quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Ovarian) were calculated, and chemotherapy completion and adverse intervention effects recorded. Results: Seventeen women were enrolled (63% recruitment rate). Mean age was 60 years (SD = 8 years), 88% were diagnosed with FIGO stage III or IV disease, 14 women underwent adjuvant and three neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. On average, women adhered to > 80% of their intervention sessions and complied with 76% of their walking targets, with the majority walking four days a week at moderate intensity for 30 minutes per session. Meaningful improvements were found in physical functioning, physical symptoms, physical well-being and ovarian cancerspecific quality of life. Most women (76%) completed ≥85% of their planned chemotherapy dose. There were no withdrawals or serious adverse events and all women reported the program as being helpful. Conclusions: These positive preliminary results suggest that this walking intervention for women receiving chemotherapy for ovarian cancer is safe, feasible and acceptable and could be used in development of future work. Trial registration: ACTRN12609000252213

Ginger - mechanism of action in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A review

Despite advances in anti-emetic therapy, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) still poses a significant burden to patients undergoing chemotherapy. Nausea, in particular, is still highly prevalent in this population. Ginger has been traditionally used as a folk remedy for gastrointestinal complaints and has been suggested as a viable adjuvant treatment for nausea and vomiting in the cancer context. Substantial research has revealed ginger to possess properties that could exert multiple beneficial effects on chemotherapy patients who experience nausea and vomiting. Bioactive compounds within the rhizome of ginger, particularly the gingerol and shogaol class of compounds, interact with several pathways that are directly implicated in CINV in addition to pathways that could play secondary roles by exacerbating symptoms. These properties include 5-HT3, substance P and acetylcholine receptor antagonism; anti-inflammatory properties; and modulation of cellular redox signalling, vasopressin release, gastrointestinal motility, and gastric emptying rate. This review outlines these proposed mechanisms by discussing the results of clinical, in vitro and animal studies both within the chemotherapy context and in other relevant fields. The evidence presented in this review indicates that ginger possesses multiple properties that could be beneficial in reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer : the Leicester (UK) experience

Aims: After failure of anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer, treatment options until recently were limited. Until the introduction of capecitabine and vinorelbine, no standard regimen was available. We conducted a retrospective study to determine the efficacy and toxicity of platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Materials and methods: Forty-two women with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines (93%) and/or taxanes (36%) received mitomycin-vinblastine-cisplatin (MVP) (n = 23), or cisplatin-etoposide (PE) (n = 19), as first-, second- and third-line treatment at a tertiary referral centre between 1997 and 2002. Chemotherapy was given every 3 weeks as follows: mitomycin-C (8 mg/m 2) (cycles 1, 2, 4, 6), vinblastine (6 mg/m 2), and cisplatin (50 mg/m 2) all on day 1; and cisplatin (75 mg/m 2) and etoposide (100 mg/m 2) on day 1 and (100 mg/m 2) orally twice a day on days 2-3. Results: The response rate for 40 evaluable patients (MVP: n = 23; PE: n = 17) was 18% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9-32%). The response rate to MVP was 13% (95% CI: 5-32%, one complete and two partial responses) and to PE 24% (10-47%, four partial responses). Disease stabilised in 43% (26-63%) and 47% (26-69%) of women treated with MVP and PE, respectively. After a median follow-up of 18 months, 37 women (MVP: n = 19; PE: n = 18) died from their disease. Median (range) progression-free survival and overall survival were 6 months (0.4-18.7) and 9.9 months (1.3-40.8), respectively. Median progression-free survival for the MVP and PE groups was 5.5 and 6.2 months (Log-rank, P = 0.82), and median overall survival was 10.2 and 9.4 months (Log-rank, P = 0.46), respectively. The main toxicity was myelosuppression. Grades 3-4 neutropenia was more common in women treated with PE than in women treated with MVP (74% vs 30%; P = 0.012), but the incidence of neutropenic sepsis, relative to the number of chemotherapy cycles, was low (7% overall). The toxicity-related hospitalisation rate was 1.2 admissions per six cycles of chemotherapy. No treatment-related deaths occurred. MVP and PE chemotherapy have modest activity and are safe in women with metastatic breast cancer. © 2005 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The role of chemotherapy in the treatment of adult soft tissue sarcomas

Adult soft tissue sarcomas are relatively rare tumours which are curable with radical surgery. Approximately 50% of patients will develop inoperable disease or metastases for which chemotherapy may be inappropriate. Only two cytotoxic agents - doxorubicin and ifosfamide - have activity in > 20% of patients. For both these agents there is evidence of a dose-response relationship. There is currently no good evidence that combination chemotherapy confers a clinical benefit compared with single agents. Outside a clinical trial, standard first-line therapy should be with single agent doxorubicin at a dose intensity ≥ 70 mg2 every 3 weeks. Approximately 25% of patients may be expected to respond to this regimen. There is the suggestion that responses may occur to ifosfamide in patients who progress on doxorubicin. The role of chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting remains uncertain. Several trials have suggested a modest relapse-free and overall survival benefit for the use of post-operative chemotherapy and a recent overview of 14 randomised trials confirms a small though significant benefit. These benefits have to be weighed against the toxicity of chemotherapy. The importance of treating all patients with soft tissue sarcomas in clinical trials is stressed. There is an urgent need to define new active agents to treat this disease.

Can ginger ameliorate chemotherapy-induced nausea? Protocol of a randomized double blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background Preliminary research shows ginger may be an effective adjuvant treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting but significant limitations need to be addressed before recommendations for clinical practice can be made. Methods/Design In a double–blinded randomised-controlled trial, chemotherapy-naïve patients will be randomly allocated to receive either 1.2 g of a standardised ginger extract or placebo per day. The study medication will be administrated as an adjuvant treatment to standard anti-emetic therapy and will be divided into four capsules per day, to be consumed approximately every 4 hours (300 mg per capsule administered q.i.d) for five days during the first three cycles of chemotherapy. Acute, delayed, and anticipatory symptoms of nausea and vomiting will be assessed over this time frame using a valid and reliable questionnaire, with nausea symptoms being the primary outcome. Quality of life, nutritional status, adverse effects, patient adherence, cancer-related fatigue, and CINV-specific prognostic factors will also be assessed. Discussion Previous trials in this area have noted limitations. These include the inconsistent use of standardized ginger formulations and valid questionnaires, lack of control for anticipatory nausea and prognostic factors that may influence individual CINV response, and the use of suboptimal dosing regimens. This trial is the first to address these issues by incorporating multiple unique additions to the study design including controlling for CINV-specific prognostic factors by recruiting only chemotherapy-naïve patients, implementing a dosing schedule consistent with the pharmacokinetics of oral ginger supplements, and independently analysing ginger supplements before and after recruitment to ensure potency. Our trial will also be the first to assess the effect of ginger supplementation on cancer-related fatigue and nutritional status. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms experienced by oncology patients; this trial will address the significant limitations within the current literature and in doing so, will investigate the effect of ginger supplementation as an adjuvant treatment in modulating nausea and vomiting symptoms. Trial registration

Paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line single-agent chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study with cross-over.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin given as single agents in first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer (primary end point, progression-free survival ¿PFS) and to explore the degree of cross-resistance between the two agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2), 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks, or doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus every 3 weeks. Seven courses were planned unless progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred before the seven courses were finished. Patients who progressed within the seven courses underwent early cross-over to the alternative drug, while a delayed cross-over was optional for the remainder of patients at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: Objective response in first-line therapy was significantly better (P =.003) for doxorubicin (response rate ¿RR, 41%) than for paclitaxel (RR, 25%), with doxorubicin achieving a longer median PFS (7.5 months for doxorubicin v 3.9 months for paclitaxel, P <.001). In second-line therapy, cross-over to doxorubicin (91 patients) and to paclitaxel (77 patients) gave response rates of 30% and 16%, respectively. The median survival durations of 18.3 months for doxorubicin and 15.6 months for paclitaxel were not significantly different (P =.38). The doxorubicin arm had greater toxicity, but this was counterbalanced by better symptom control. CONCLUSION: At the dosages and schedules used in the present study, doxorubicin achieves better disease and symptom control than paclitaxel in first-line treatment. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel are not totally cross-resistant, which supports further investigation of these drugs in combination or in sequence, both in advanced disease and in the adjuvant setting.

The impact of chemotherapy dose density and dose intensity on breast cancer outcome: what have we learned?

Optimising chemotherapy dose density and dose intensity are strategies aimed at improving outcomes in adjuvant therapy for patients with breast cancer. There are, in theory, at least five models allowing the delivery of a higher overall drug dose intensity. These are reviewed in this article and vary according to three main variables: the dose per course, the interval between doses and the total cumulative dose. Cyclophosphamide, anthracyclines and taxanes are among the most active agents for the treatment of breast cancer and, as such, they have been or are currently the focus of prospective, randomised clinical trials testing some of these dose-intensity models in the adjuvant setting. The results of recent trials suggest that anthracyclines, but not cyclophosphamide, are associated with better outcomes if used at higher doses per course and at higher cumulative doses. However, care has to be taken with premenopausal women where an increased dose of anthracycline per course but a reduced cumulative dose appears to produce a worse outcome. Moreover, decreasing the interval between doses, for anthracyclines and cyclophosphamide, does not seem to provide, so far, additional benefits for women with locally advanced breast cancer. This approach is not feasible with docetaxel, since an increase in dose density induces unwanted side-effects. These results represent our current state of knowledge, but clinical trials are being performed to evaluate further the effect of dose intensity, dose density and cumulative dose of key therapeutic agents on patient outcomes.

Adjuvant portal-vein infusion of fluorouracil and heparin in colorectal cancer: A randomised trial

Background. There is conflicting evidence on the efficacy of regional adjuvant chemotherapy, via portal-vein infusion (PVI), after resection of colorectal cancer. We undertook a randomised controlled multicentre trial to investigate the efficacy of PVI (500 mg/m2 fluorouracil plus 5000 IU heparin daily for 7 days). Methods. 1235 of about 1500 potentially eligible patients were randomly assigned surgery plus PVI or surgery alone (control). The patients were followed up for a median of 63 months, with yearly screening for recurrent disease. The primary endpoint was survival; analyses were by intention to treat. Findings. 619 patients in the control group and 616 in the PVI group met eligibility criteria. 164 (26%) control-group patients and 173 (28%) PVI-group patients died. 5-year survival did not differ significantly between the groups (73 vs 72%; 95% CI for difference -6 to 4). The control and PVI groups were also similar in terms of disease-free survival at 5 years (67 vs 65%) and the number of patients with liver metastases (79 vs 77%). Interpretation. PVI of fluorouracil, at a dose of 500 mg/m2 for 7 days, cannot be recommended as the sole adjuvant treatment for high-risk colorectal cancer after complete surgical excision. However, these results cannot eliminate a small benefit when PVI is used at a higher dosage or in combination with mitomycin.