A phase III randomized, double-blind placebo controlled study of armodafinil (Nuvigil) to reduce cancer-related fatigue in patients with high-grade glioma (Alliance A221101).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12007-12007
Author(s):  
Alyx B. Porter ◽  
Heshan Liu ◽  
Sadhna Kohli ◽  
Jane H. Cerhan ◽  
Jeff A. Sloan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Grade Glioma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Fatigue Score ◽  
Severe Fatigue ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Endpoint Data

12007 Background: Up to 96% of patients with high grade glioma (HGG) report moderate to severe fatigue. Armodafinil, the R-enantiomer of modafinil, is a psychostimulant with low potential for abuse that has shown potential for improving severe fatigue in HGG patients. Methods: In this phase III double blinded placebo-controlled study, adults with HGG and moderate to severe fatigue, > 4 weeks after completing radiotherapy, were randomized to receive armodafinil daily (150 mg or 250 mg) or placebo for a total of 8 weeks. The primary outcome was efficacy in treating severe fatigue. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of tolerability, neurocognitive function, and quality of life. Patients were evaluated at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks. Results: A total of 328 patients were enrolled between 6/3/13-3/1/19. There were 103 (150 mg arm), 97 (250 mg arm) and 97 (placebo arm) evaluable patients with primary endpoint data available. The median age was 60 years (20-85) with a median Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) worst fatigue score of 8 (6-10). 60.3% were male, 80.5% received concomitant chemotherapy, and 39.7% were on corticosteroids. The global fatigue score at end of weeks 4 and 8 were lower than at baseline (p<0.0001) and in the 250 mg arm than placebo (p=0.0356) and was higher for corticosteroid users than non-users (p=0.0002). There was no statistically significant difference for clinically meaningful improvement in BFI usual fatigue score from baseline to end of week 8 between the three arms (p=0.9601). Patients reported an improvement in concentration at week 4 from baseline on the 150 mg arm(P=0.0311). There was no statistically significant difference on neurocognitive tests from baseline to end of week 4 (p>0.05) or week 8 (p>0.05) between arms. More patients reported insomnia on the 250 mg arm (p=0.0083). Conclusions: There is no meaningful benefit of the use of armodafinil to reduce moderate to severe fatigue in patients with HGG. In certain cases there may be benefit of armodafinil 150 mg to aid concentration without the risk of insomnia.Support: UG1CA189823;U10CA180868 (NRG). Clinical trial information: NCT01781468 .

scholarly journals Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Long-Acting Methylphenidate for Cancer-Related Fatigue: North Central Cancer Treatment Group NCCTG-N05C7 Trial

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (23) ◽  
pp. 3673-3679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda R. Moraska ◽  
Amit Sood ◽  
Shaker R. Dakhil ◽  
Jeff A. Sloan ◽  
Debra Barton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Short Form ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Symptom Experience ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Time Curve ◽  
Cancer Related Fatigue ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Long Acting

Purpose Fatigue is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. This trial was developed to evaluate the efficacy of long-acting methylphenidate for improving cancer-related fatigue and to assess its toxicities. Patients and Methods Adults with cancer were randomly assigned in a double-blinded manner to receive methylphenidate (target dose, 54 mg/d) or placebo for 4 weeks. The Brief Fatigue Inventory was the primary outcome measure, while secondary outcome measures included a Symptom Experience Diary (SED), the Short Form-36 (SF-36) Vitality Subscale, a linear analog self-assessment, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and the Subject Global Impression of Change. Results In total, 148 patients were enrolled. Using an area under the serum concentration-time curve analysis, there was no evidence that methylphenidate, as compared with placebo, improved the primary end point of cancer-related fatigue in this patient population (P = .35). Comparisons of secondary end points, including clinically significant changes in quality-of-life variables and cancer-related fatigue change from baseline, were similarly negative. However, a subset analysis suggested that patients with more severe fatigue and/or with more advanced disease did have some fatigue improvement with methylphenidate (eg, in patients with stage III or IV disease, the mean improvement in usual fatigue was 19.7 with methylphenidate v 2.1 with placebo; P = .02). There was a significant difference in self-reported toxicities (SED), with increased levels of nervousness and appetite loss in the methylphenidate arm. Conclusion This clinical trial was unable to support the primary prestudy hypothesis that the chosen long-acting methylphenidate product would decrease cancer-related fatigue.

scholarly journals Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Assess the Efficacy and Toxicity of Subcutaneous Ketamine in the Management of Cancer Pain

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (29) ◽  
pp. 3611-3617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Hardy ◽  
Stephen Quinn ◽  
Belinda Fazekas ◽  
John Plummer ◽  
Simon Eckermann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Net Benefit ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Significant Difference

Purpose The anesthetic ketamine is widely used for pain related to cancer, but the evidence to support its use in this setting is weak. This study aimed to determine whether ketamine is more effective than placebo when used in conjunction with opioids and standard adjuvant therapy in the management of chronic uncontrolled cancer pain. Ketamine would be considered of net benefit if it provided clinically relevant improvement in pain with limited breakthrough analgesia and acceptable toxicity. Patients and Methods In this multisite, dose-escalation, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trial, ketamine or placebo was delivered subcutaneously over 3 to 5 days. Results In all, 185 participants were included in the primary analysis. There was no significant difference between the proportion of positive outcomes (0.04; 95% CI, −0.10 to 0.18; P = .55) in the placebo and intervention arms (response rates, 27% [25 of 92] and 31% [29 of 93]). Pain type (nociceptive v neuropathic) was not a predictor of response. There was almost twice the incidence of adverse events worse than baseline in the ketamine group after day 1 (incidence rate ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.46 to 2.61; P < .001) and throughout the study. Those receiving ketamine were more likely to experience a more severe grade of adverse event per day (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.18; P = .039). The number of patients needed to treat for one additional patient to have a positive outcome from ketamine was 25 (95% CI, six to ∞). The number needed to harm, because of toxicity-related withdrawal, was six (95% CI, four to 13). Conclusion Ketamine does not have net clinical benefit when used as an adjunct to opioids and standard coanalgesics in cancer pain.

Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Epoetin Alfa Compared With Placebo in Anemic Patients Receiving Chemotherapy

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (12) ◽  
pp. 2606-2617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Witzig ◽  
Peter T. Silberstein ◽  
Charles L. Loprinzi ◽  
Jeff A. Sloan ◽  
Paul J. Novotny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Epoetin Alfa ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Myelosuppressive Chemotherapy ◽  
Fatigue Score ◽  
Ortho Biotech ◽  
Cancer Related Anemia

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 ≥ 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.

Kava for generalised anxiety disorder: A 16-week double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome Sarris ◽  
Gerard J Byrne ◽  
Chad A Bousman ◽  
Lachlan Cribb ◽  
Karen M Savage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Anxiety Reduction ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Relative Reduction ◽  
Generalised Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective: Previous randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies have shown that Kava (a South Pacific medicinal plant) reduced anxiety during short-term administration. The objective of this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to perform a larger, longer-term trial assessing the efficacy and safety of Kava in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder and to determine whether gamma-aminobutyric acid transporter (SLC6A1) single-nucleotide polymorphisms were moderators of response. Methods: The trial was a phase III, multi-site, two-arm, 16-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating an aqueous extract of dried Kava root administered twice per day in tablet form (standardised to 120 mg of kavalactones twice/day) in 171 currently non-medicated anxious participants with diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder. The trial took place in Australia. Results: An analysis of 171 participants revealed a non-significant difference in anxiety reduction between the Kava and placebo groups (a relative reduction favouring placebo of 1.37 points; p = 0.25). At the conclusion of the controlled phase, 17.4% of the Kava group were classified as remitted (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score < 7) compared to 23.8% of the placebo group ( p = 0.46). No SLC6A1 polymorphisms were associated with treatment response, while carriers of the rs2601126 T allele preferentially respond to placebo ( p = 0.006). Kava was well tolerated aside from poorer memory (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.044) and tremor/shakiness (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.024) occurring more frequently in the Kava group. Liver function test abnormalities were significantly more frequent in the Kava group, although no participant met criteria for herb-induced hepatic injury. Conclusion: While research has generally supported Kava in non-clinical populations (potentially for more ‘situational’ anxiety as a short-term anxiolytic), this particular extract was not effective for diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder.

scholarly journals A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of subcutaneous ketamine in the management of cancer pain.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2604-2604
Author(s):  
David C Currow ◽  
Janet Hardy ◽  
Stephen Quinn ◽  
Belinda Fazekas ◽  
John Plummer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Cochrane Review ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Net Benefit ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference

2604 Background: The dissociative anaesthetic ketamine is widely used for cancer related pain. A Cochrane review concluded that insufficient evidence was available to support its use in this setting. Methods: This phase III, multisite, double-blind, dose escalation, placebo, randomised controlled study aimed to determine whether ketamine, delivered subcutaneously over three to five days is more effective than placebo, when used in conjunction with adjuvant therapy in the management of chronic uncontrolled cancer pain. Ketamine would be considered to be of net benefit if it provided a reduction in average pain scores by ≥2/10 points from baseline, with limited breakthrough analgesia and acceptable toxicity. Results: For the 185 participants, there was no significant difference between the proportion of positive outcomes (0.04 (-0.10, 0.18) p=0.55) in the placebo and intervention arms (response rates 27% (25/92) and 31% (29/93)). Pain type (nociceptive versus neuropathic) was not a predictor of response. There was almost twice the incidence of adverse events worse than baseline in the ketamine group after day 1 (IRR = 1.95 (1.46, 2.61), p<0.001) and throughout the study. Those receiving ketamine were more likely to experience a more severe grade of adverse event/day (OR=1.09 (1.00, 1.18), p=0.039). The number needed to treat for one additional patient to get a positive outcome from ketamine was 25 (6, ∞). The number needed to harm, because of toxicity-related withdrawal was 6 (4, 13). Conclusions: Ketamine does not have net clinical benefit when used as an adjunct to opioids and standard co-analgesics in cancer pain.

Final overall survival (OS) from PROSPER: A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled study of enzalutamide (ENZA) in men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5515-5515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cora N. Sternberg ◽  
Karim Fizazi ◽  
Fred Saad ◽  
Neal D. Shore ◽  
Ugo De Giorgi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cox Regression ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Risk Of Death

5515 Background: PROSPER previously demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in metastasis-free survival (MFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29; 95% CI 0.24-0.35; P < .001) in men with nmCRPC and rapidly rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) who received ENZA. When first reported, OS was immature with only 165 of 596 (28%) prespecified deaths. Here we report results from the final OS analysis. Methods: Men with nmCRPC, PSA doubling time ≤ 10 mo, and PSA ≥ 2 ng/mL at screening continued androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and were randomized 2:1 to ENZA 160 mg or PBO. OS treatment effect was assessed using a group sequential testing procedure with O’Brien-Fleming-type alpha spending function ( P ≤ .021 required for statistical significance). Medians were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method; 95% CIs using a stratified Cox regression model. Results: As of Oct 15, 2019 (median follow-up ≈ 48 mo), there were 466 deaths (288 [30.9%] and 178 [38.0%] in the ENZA and PBO arms, respectively). ENZA significantly prolonged OS compared with PBO (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.61-0.89; P = .0011). Median OS was 67.0 mo (95% CI 64.0-not reached) in the ENZA arm and 56.3 mo (95% CI 54.4-63.0) in the PBO arm. Subsequent antineoplastic therapies were initiated after treatment discontinuation by 310 (33%) men in the ENZA arm vs 303 (65%) in the PBO arm. Median duration of treatment was 33.9 mo vs 14.2 mo with ENZA vs PBO, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were reported by 48% of men in the ENZA arm vs 27% in the PBO arm (16% vs 6% were drug related, respectively). AEs with event rates per 100 patient-yr that were ≥ 2 points higher with ENZA vs PBO were falls (9 vs 4), fatigue (14 vs 12), and hypertension (7 vs 5). Conclusions: ENZA treatment resulted in a statistically significant 27% reduced risk of death compared with PBO, demonstrating that initiation of ENZA + ADT before the onset of detectable metastasis improves OS in men with CRPC and rapidly rising PSA. This OS benefit ensues despite crossover from the PBO arm to ENZA and higher rates of subsequent antineoplastic therapies in men from the PBO arm. Safety was consistent with previous clinical trials. This final OS analysis from PROSPER provides prospective validation of MFS as a potential surrogate endpoint for OS in nmCRPC and supports the continued use of ENZA + ADT as a standard of care in men with nmCRPC and rapidly rising PSA. Clinical trial information: NCT02003924 .

scholarly journals A descriptive analysis of end-of-life discussions for high-grade glioma patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ai Chikada ◽  
Sayaka Takenouchi ◽  
Yoshiki Arakawa ◽  
Kazuko Nin
Keyword(s):  
End Of Life ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Patient Participation ◽  
High Grade Glioma ◽  
Team Approach ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Patient Goals ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Eol Care

Abstract Background End-of-life discussions (EOLDs) in patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) have not been well described. Therefore, this study examined the appropriateness of timing and the extent of patient involvement in EOLDs and their impact on HGG patients. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 105 bereaved families of HGG patients at a university hospital in Japan between July and August 2019. Fisher’s exact test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to assess the association between patient participation in EOLDs and their outcomes. Results In total, 77 questionnaires were returned (response rate 73%), of which 20 respondents replied with refusal documents. Overall, 31/57 (54%) participated in EOLDs at least once in acute hospital settings, and a significant difference was observed between participating and nonparticipating groups in communicating the patient’s wishes for EOL care to the family (48% vs 8%, P = .001). Moreover, &gt;80% of respondents indicated that the initiation of EOLDs during the early diagnosis period with patients and families was appropriate. Most EOLDs were provided by neurosurgeons (96%), and other health care providers rarely participated. Additionally, patient goals and priorities were discussed in only 28% of the EOLDs. Patient participation in EOLDs was not associated with the quality of EOL care and a good death. Conclusions Although participation in EOLDs is relatively challenging for HGG patients, this study showed that participation in EOLDs may enable patients to express their wishes regarding EOL care. It is important to initiate EOLDs early on through an interdisciplinary team approach while respecting patient goals and priorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document