Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of topical diclofenac in prevention of hand-foot syndrome in patients receiving capecitabine.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS12135-TPS12135
Author(s):  
Atul Batra ◽  
Akhil P. Santosh ◽  
Raja Pramanik ◽  
Ajay Gogia ◽  
R. M. Pandey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome ◽  
Cox 2 ◽  
Topical Diclofenac

TPS12135 Background: The pathophysiology of capecitabine induced hand-foot syndrome (HFS) includes activation of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2, leading to an upregulation of the inflammatory cascade. Prophylaxis with oral celecoxib was previously reported to be associated with a significantly lower frequency of HFS (grade 1 [29.0% vs. 72.0%, p < 0.001] and grade 2 [11.8% vs. 30.0%, p=0.024]) (1). The findings were confirmed in a phase III trial (2). However, the associated systemic adverse events limit routine prophylactic use. Till date, no clinical trials have assessed the role of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in preventing HFS. Methods: In this investigator-initiated randomised phase III double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel group trial, a total of 264 patients with any stage breast or gastrointestinal cancer planned to receive capecitabine as a single agent or in combination with other chemotherapy will be randomised (1:1) to 1% topical diclofenac or placebo (base for 1% topical diclofenac) arm at a single tertiary care cancer centre in India. Randomization will be done by stratified (male vs female, and capecitabine mono therapy vs combination) permuted block method using a computer generated random sequence and allocation concealment will be done by using sealed opaque envelopes. In both the arms, patients will be asked to apply 1 fingertip unit (FTU) of topical medication on both surfaces of bilateral hands twice daily for a total duration of 12 weeks or till development of grade 2 or higher HFS, whichever is earlier. The primary objective is to compare the effect of topical diclofenac with placebo in preventing clinically significant HFS (incidence of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0 grade 2 or higher HFS). The secondary objectives include comparison of topical diclofenac with placebo on (i) incidence of NCI CTCv5.0 all grade HFS, (ii) time to develop grade ≥2 HFS from start of capecitabine, (iii) patient-reported outcomes using HFS-14 questionnaire (iv) adherence with topical application using self-reported adherence diary, (v) capecitabine dose reductions, delays and cessation due to HFS and (vi) safety profile (NCICTCv5.0). The tertiary correlative endpoint is to correlate the occurrence and severity of HFS with serum COX-2 levels and polymorphism of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPPD) enzyme. The trial is registered at the Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI/2021/01/030592). Till date, we have enrolled 12/264 patients. (1) Zhang RX et al. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2011;137(6):953-957. (2) Zhang RX et al. Annals of oncology. 2012;23(5):1348-1353. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2021/01/030592.

A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Comparative Trial of AMD3100 (Plerixafor)+G-CSF vs. G-CSF+Placebo for Mobilization in Multiple Myeloma (MM) Patients for Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell (aHSC) Transplantation.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 445-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
John DiPersio ◽  
Edward A. Stadtmauer ◽  
Auayporn P. Nademanee ◽  
Patrick Stiff ◽  
Ivana Micallef ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Rescue Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Post Transplant ◽  
Transplant Patients ◽  
Cd34 Cells

Abstract AMD3100, Plerixafor (A)+G-CSF (G) have effectively allowed aHSC mobilization in Phase I and II studies. This Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study compares the safety and efficacy of A+G Vs. placebo (P)+G to mobilize and transplant patients with MM. Methods: Adult MM patients requiring an aHSC transplant, in first or second CR or PR were eligible to participate. Patients were declared for single or tandem transplant with the second transplant occurring within 6 months from the first. Patients received G (10μg/kg/day) subcutaneously (SQ) for 4 days; on the evening of Day 4 they received either A (240μg/kg SQ) or P. Patients underwent apheresis on Day 5 after an AM dose of G and 10–11 hours after administration of study treatment. Patients continued to receive the evening dose of study treatment followed by AM dose of G and apheresis for up to a total of 4 apheresis or until ≥6 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg were collected. Patients who failed to collect ≥2 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg were eligible for rescue therapy with A+G, without unblinding of randomized treatment. Only study cells were used for transplant. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients who achieved ≥6 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg in 2 or less apheresis days. All patients will be followed for ≥12 months post-transplant. Results: 302 patients were enrolled and randomized into the study. All have completed 100 days follow-up and are included in this intent-to-treat analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The primary endpoint was met in 106/128 (72%) patients in the A+G group and 53/154 (34%) patients in the P+G group, p<0.0001. The figure shows that 54% of A+G patients reached target after 1 day of apheresis but 56% P+G patients required up to 4 days of apheresis to reach target. 7 patients in the P+G group required rescue therapy and all collected ≥2 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg after A+G rescue. 142 patients (96%) in A+G group and 136 patients (88%) in the P+G group underwent transplant. Tandem transplants were performed in 32 and 28 patients in A+G and P+G groups, respectively. Median time to engraftment was Day 11 for PMN and Day 18 for platelets in both groups. Grafts were durable in all patients in both group at ≥100 days post-transplant. Patients in the A+G group experienced more GI effects and injection site erythema than patients in the P+G group. These adverse events were generally mild. There were no drug related serious adverse events in either group. Conclusions: In this study, the addition of AMD3100 to G-CSF is generally safe and well tolerated and is superior to G-CSF alone for aHSC mobilization in MM patients. A+G patients were statistically significantly more likely to achieve target earlier than P+G patients and had successful transplant. Figure Figure

scholarly journals Tofacitinib for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

2021 ◽  
pp. annrheumdis-2020-219601
Author(s):  
Atul Deodhar ◽  
Paula Sliwinska-Stanczyk ◽  
Huji Xu ◽  
Xenofon Baraliakos ◽  
Lianne S Gensler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Herpes Zoster ◽  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy/safety of tofacitinib in adult patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).MethodsThis phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with active AS, meeting the modified New York criteria, with centrally read radiographs, and an inadequate response or intolerance to ≥2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day or placebo for 16 weeks. After week 16, all patients received open-label tofacitinib until week 48. The primary and key secondary endpoints were Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society ≥20% improvement (ASAS20) and ≥40% improvement (ASAS40) responses, respectively, at week 16. Safety was assessed throughout.Results269 patients were randomised and treated: tofacitinib, n=133; placebo, n=136. At week 16, the ASAS20 response rate was significantly (p<0.0001) greater with tofacitinib (56.4%, 75 of 133) versus placebo (29.4%, 40 of 136), and the ASAS40 response rate was significantly (p<0.0001) greater with tofacitinib (40.6%, 54 of 133) versus placebo (12.5%, 17 of 136). Up to week 16, with tofacitinib and placebo, respectively, 73 of 133 (54.9%) and 70 of 136 (51.5%) patients had adverse events; 2 of 133 (1.5%) and 1 of 136 (0.7%) had serious adverse events. Up to week 48, with tofacitinib, 3 of 133 (2.3%) patients had adjudicated hepatic events, 3 of 133 (2.3%) had non-serious herpes zoster, and 1 of 133 (0.8%) had a serious infection; with placebo→tofacitinib, 2 (1.5%) patients had non-serious herpes zoster. There were no deaths, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, thromboembolic events or opportunistic infections.ConclusionsIn adults with active AS, tofacitinib demonstrated significantly greater efficacy versus placebo. No new potential safety risks were identified.Trial registration numberNCT03502616

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document