Phase I trial of FOLFIRI in combination with sorafenib and bevacizumab in patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies.

BACKGROUND: A previous phase II trial in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer demonstrated a 63 % disease control rate with a combination of bevacizumab and sorafenib. This phase I trial sought to determine the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of bevacizumab and sorafenib combined with standard cytotoxic therapy for advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. METHODS: A standard 3 + 3 trial design utilized 3 escalating sorafenib dose levels: (1) 200 mg daily, days 3-7, 10-14; (2) 200 mg twice daily, days 3-6, 10-13; and (3) 200 mg twice daily, days 3-7, 10-14 combined with standard dose FOLFIRI (5-fluouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg), repeated every 14 days. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were evaluable for safety and response assessment. There were no dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) at dose level 1 or 2. At dose level 3, two patients experienced DLTs (asymptomatic grade 3 hypophosphatemia, grade 3 dehydration and diarrhea). The MTD was determined to be dose level 2: sorafenib 200 mg twice daily, days 3-6, 10-13 combined with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab at standard doses. Four patients had a partial response and 8 had stable disease as best response (disease control rate of 80 %). Three patients with CRC had disease control >12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of this regimen is sorafenib 200 mg twice daily, days 3-6, 10-13 combined with standard doses of FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. Dual antiangiogenic treatment combined with cytotoxic therapy may provide prolonged disease stabilization for select patients with advanced GI malignancies.

5-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of immediate versus delayed zoledronic acid for the prevention of bone loss in postmenopausal women with breast cancer starting letrozole after tamoxifen: N03CC (Alliance) trial.

BACKGROUND: Postmenopausal women with breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors are at an increased risk of bone loss. The current study was undertaken to determine whether upfront versus delayed treatment with zoledronic acid (ZA) impacted bone loss. This report described the 5-year follow-up results. METHODS: A total of 551 postmenopausal women with breast cancer who completed tamoxifen treatment and were undergoing daily letrozole treatment were randomized to either upfront (274 patients) or delayed (277 patients) ZA at a dose of 4 mg intravenously every 6 months. In the patients on the delayed treatment arm, ZA was initiated for a postbaseline bone mineral density T-score of <-2.0 or fracture. RESULTS: The incidence of a 5% decrease in the total lumbar spine bone mineral density at 5 years was 10.2% in the upfront treatment arm versus 41.2% in the delayed treatment arm (P<.0001). A total of 41 patients in the delayed treatment arm were eventually started on ZA. With the exception of increased NCI Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) grade 1/2 elevated creatinine and fever in the patients treated on the upfront arm and cerebrovascular ischemia among those in the delayed treatment arm, there were no significant differences observed between arms with respect to the most common adverse events of arthralgia and back pain. Osteoporosis occurred less frequently in the upfront treatment arm (2 vs 8 cumulative cases), although this difference was not found to be statistically significant. Bone fractures occurred in 24 patients in the upfront treatment arm versus 25 patients in the delayed treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate treatment with ZA prevented bone loss compared with delayed treatment in postmenopausal women receiving letrozole and these differences were maintained at 5 years. The incidence of osteoporosis or fractures was not found to be significantly different between treatment arms.

North Central Cancer Treatment Group N10C2 (Alliance): a double-blind placebo-controlled study of magnesium supplements to reduce menopausal hot flashes.

OBJECTIVE: Hot flashes are a common symptom in breast cancer survivors that can negatively impact quality of life. Preliminary data suggested that magnesium might be used as an effective low-cost treatment of hot flashes with minimal adverse effects. METHODS: A four-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial was conducted. Postmenopausal women with a history of breast cancer and bothersome hot flashes were randomized into treatment groups of magnesium oxide 800 or 1,200 mg daily or corresponding placebo groups at a 2:2:(1:1) ratio. Hot flash frequency and hot flash score (number × mean severity) were measured using a validated hot flash diary. A 1-week baseline period preceded initiation of study medication. The primary endpoint was intrapatient difference in mean hot flash score between baseline and treatment periods, comparing each magnesium group with the combined placebo groups using a gatekeeping procedure. Results were analyzed using repeated-measures and growth curve models on weekly hot flash scores based on a modified intent-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-nine women enrolled between December 2011 and March 2013. Study groups were well balanced for baseline characteristics. Mean hot flash scores, mean hot flash frequencies, and associated changes during the treatment period were similar for each group. An increased incidence of diarrhea and a corresponding lower incidence of constipation were reported in magnesium arms compared with placebo. No statistically significant difference in other toxicities or quality-of-life measures was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this trial do not support the use of magnesium oxide for hot flashes.