Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 94(9): 1814-1824, 2019 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31405750

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether N-acetylcysteine rinse was safe and could improve thickened secretions and dry mouth during and after radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We designed a prospective pilot double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial (Alliance MC13C2). Adult patients (age ≥18 years) were enrolled if they underwent chemoradiotherapy (≥60 Gy). Patients initiated testing rinse within 3 days of starting radiotherapy. With swish-and-spit, they received 10% N-acetylcysteine (2500 mg daily) or placebo rinse solution 5 times daily during radiotherapy and 2 weeks postradiotherapy. The primary aim was to evaluate N-acetylcysteine in improvement of saliva viscosity with the Groningen Radiotherapy-Induced Xerostomia questionnaire. Secondary aims included evaluating xerostomia improvement by the same questionnaire and with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Head and Neck-35 Questions survey and adverse-event profiles. The type I error rate was 20%. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were balanced for placebo (n=17) and N-acetylcysteine (n=15). N-acetylcysteine was better for improving sticky saliva (area under curve, P=.12). Scores of multiple secondary end points favored N-acetylcysteine, including sticky saliva daytime (P=.04), daytime and total xerostomia (both P=.02), pain (P=.18), and trouble with social eating (P=.15). Repeated measures models confirmed the findings. Taste was a major dissatisifer for N-acetylcysteine rinse; however, both testing rinses were safe and well tolerated overall. CONCLUSION: Our pilot data showed that N-acetylcysteine rinse was safe and provided strong evidence of potential efficacy for improving thickened saliva and xerostomia by patient-reported outcome. A confirmatory phase 3 trial is required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02123511.


Subject(s)
Acetylcysteine/therapeutic use , Chemoradiotherapy/adverse effects , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Mouthwashes/pharmacology , Mucositis/therapy , Xerostomia/drug therapy , Aged , Chemoradiotherapy/methods , Double-Blind Method , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Head and Neck Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mouth Mucosa/drug effects , Mucositis/etiology , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Patient Safety , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Reference Values , Risk Assessment , Treatment Outcome , Xerostomia/etiology
2.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 95(4): 1168-74, 2016 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27354129

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To provide confirmatory evidence on the use of sulfasalazine to reduce enteritis during pelvic radiation therapy (RT), following 2 prior single-institution trials suggestive that benefit existed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multi-institution, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial was designed to assess the efficacy of sulfasalazine versus placebo in the treatment of RT-related enteritis during RT including the posterior pelvis (45.0-53.5 Gy) and conducted through a multicenter national cooperative research alliance. Patients received 1000 mg of sulfasalazine or placebo orally twice daily during and for 4 weeks after RT. The primary endpoint was maximum severity of diarrhea (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0). Toxicity and bowel function were assessed by providers through a self-administered bowel function questionnaire taken weekly during RT and for 6 weeks afterward. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were enrolled in the trial between April 29, 2011, and May 13, 2013, with evenly distributed baseline factors. At the time of a planned interim toxicity analysis, more patients with grade ≥3 diarrhea received sulfasalazine than received placebo (29% vs 11%, P=.04). A futility analysis showed that trial continuation would be unlikely to yield a positive result, and a research board recommended halting study treatment. Final analysis of the primary endpoint showed no significant difference in maximum diarrhea severity between the sulfasalazine and placebo arms (P=.41). CONCLUSIONS: Sulfasalazine does not reduce enteritis during pelvic RT and may be associated with a higher risk of adverse events than placebo. This trial illustrates the importance of confirmatory phase 3 trials in the evaluation of symptom-control agents.


Subject(s)
Diarrhea/prevention & control , Pelvis/radiation effects , Radiation Injuries/prevention & control , Sulfasalazine/therapeutic use , Acute Disease , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Double-Blind Method , Enteritis/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
3.
J Natl Cancer Inst ; 105(16): 1230-8, 2013 Aug 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23853057

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Safe, effective interventions to improve cancer-related fatigue (CRF) are needed because it remains a prevalent, distressing, and activity-limiting symptom. Based on pilot data, a phase III trial was developed to evaluate the efficacy of American ginseng on CRF. METHODS: A multisite, double-blind trial randomized fatigued cancer survivors to 2000mg of American ginseng vs a placebo for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the general subscale of the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form (MFSI-SF) at 4 weeks. Changes from baseline at 4 and 8 weeks were evaluated between arms by a two-sided, two-sample t test. Toxicities were evaluated by self-report and the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) provider grading. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-four participants were enrolled from 40 institutions. Changes from baseline in the general subscale of the MFSI-SF were 14.4 (standard deviation [SD] = 27.1) in the ginseng arm vs 8.2 (SD = 24.8) in the placebo arm at 4 weeks (P = .07). A statistically significant difference was seen at 8 weeks with a change score of 20 (SD = 27) for the ginseng group and 10.3 (SD = 26.1) for the placebo group (P = .003). Greater benefit was reported in patients receiving active cancer treatment vs those who had completed treatment. Toxicities per self-report and CTCAE grading did not differ statistically significantly between arms. CONCLUSIONS: Data support the benefit of American ginseng, 2000mg daily, on CRF over an 8-week period. There were no discernible toxicities associated with the treatment. Studies to increase knowledge to guide the role of ginseng to improve CRF are needed.


Subject(s)
Fatigue/drug therapy , Fatigue/etiology , Neoplasms/complications , Panax , Phytotherapy/methods , Plant Extracts/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...