Search

PURPOSE A minority of cancer survivors develops long-term postsurgical neuropathic pain. Based on evidence that capsaicin, the pungent ingredient in hot chili peppers, might be useful for treating neuropathic pain, we developed the present clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Ninety-nine assessable patients with postsurgical neuropathic pain were entered onto this study. After stratification, patients were to receive 8 weeks of a 0.075% capsaicin cream followed by 8 weeks of an identical-appearing placebo cream, or vice versa. A capsaicin/placebo cream was to be applied to the painful site four times daily. Treatment evaluation was performed by patient-completed weekly questionnaires. RESULTS During the first 8-week study period, the capsaicin-cream arm was associated with substantially more skin burning, skin redness, and coughing (P < .0001 for each). Nonetheless, treatment was stopped for patient refusal or toxicity just as often while patients were receiving the placebo as compared with the capsaicin. The capsaicin cream arm had substantially more pain relief (P = .01) after the first 8 weeks, with an average pain reduction of 53% versus 17%. On completion of the 16-week study period, patients were asked which treatment period was most beneficial. Of the responding patients, 60% chose the capsaicin arm, 18% chose the placebo arm, and 22% chose neither (P = .001). CONCLUSION A topical capsaicin cream decreases postsurgical neuropathic pain and, despite some toxicities, is preferred by patients over a placebo by a three-to-one margin among those expressing a preference.

PURPOSE To evaluate the objective tumor response rate and toxicities of patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma treated with irinotecan hydrochloride (CPT-11). PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 121 patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma--90 with prior fluorouracil (5-FU) exposure and 31 chemotherapeutically naive patients--were enrolled between May 1993 and June 1994. Patients were treated with CPT-11 at 125 mg/m2 intravenously weekly for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week rest. RESULTS Among 90 patients with prior 5-FU chemotherapy, 12 partial responses were observed (response rate, 13.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1% to 22.1%). Among 31 chemotherapy-naive patients, eight had partial responses (response rate, 25.8%; 95% CI, 11.9% to 44.6%). The median response duration as measured from time of initial treatment for the two groups was 7.7 months and 7.6 months, respectively. The major adverse reactions were gastrointestinal and hematologic. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 diarrhea was 36.4%, while the overall incidence of grade 3 or 4 leukopenia was 21.5% of patients. Only four of 121 patients (3.3%) developed neutropenic fever (grade 4 neutropenia with > or = grade 2 fever). The incidence of grade 4 leukopenia was higher in patients with prior pelvic radiotherapy (chi2 test P = .04), while the incidence of grade 3 or 4 diarrhea demonstrated no association with previous pelvic irradiation. CONCLUSION According to the study design, CPT-11 showed promising activity in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma and modest activity in patients with prior 5-FU exposure. The toxicity with this schedule appears manageable with appropriate dose modification for individual patient tolerance and an intensive loperamide regimen for the management of diarrhea. Care should be taken when treating patients with prior pelvic radiotherapy because of the increased risk of neutropenia.

PURPOSE Stomatitis is a major dose-limiting toxicity of bolus fluorouracil (5FU)-based chemotherapy regimens, despite the use of oral cryotherapy. Pursuant to preliminary data that suggested a sucralfate oral solution could alleviate chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis, we developed a prospective trial to test this contention. PATIENTS AND METHODS A phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was designed. Patients were entered onto the study at the time of the first cycle of 5FU-based chemotherapy. All patients received oral cryotherapy for 30 minutes with each dose of 5FU. In addition, each patient was randomized to receive either a sucralfate solution or a placebo solution to be used if they developed mouth tenderness or mouth sores. The study solution was to be used four times daily for 7 days starting on the first day of mouth tenderness or mouth sores. Stomatitis scores were determined by health care providers and by patients themselves. RESULTS There was a total of 131 assessable patients entered onto this trial, 50 of whom developed mucositis and used the study medication (27 sucralfate and 23 placebo). There was no suggestion of any difference in stomatitis severity or duration on either protocol arm. CONCLUSION The resultant data from this clinical trial did not support the prestudy hypothesis that sucralfate would be beneficial for the treatment of 5FU-induced stomatitis.

PURPOSE Megestrol acetate has been reported to improve appetite and quality of life and to decrease nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer anorexia/cachexia. The present trial was formulated to evaluate the impact of megestrol acetate on quality of life, toxicity, response, and survival in individuals with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer who received concomitant chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomized to receive megestrol acetate 800 mg/d orally or placebo. In addition, all patients were scheduled to receive a maximum of four cycles of cisplatin and etoposide chemotherapy. Quality of life was self-assessed at entry onto study, with every cycle of chemotherapy, and 4 months thereafter with a linear visual analog scale. Toxicity was evaluated by patient questionnaire and investigator reports. RESULTS A total of 243 eligible patients were randomized. Those who received megestrol acetate had increased nonfluid weight gain (P = .004) and significantly less nausea (P = .0002) and vomiting (P = .02). Significant thromboembolic phenomena occurred more often in patients who received megestrol acetate versus placebo (9% v 2%, P = .01). Patients who received megestrol acetate had more edema (30% v 20%, P = .002), an inferior response rate to chemotherapy (68% v 80%, P = .03), and a trend for inferior survival duration (median, 8.2 v 10.0 months, P = .49). These findings may have been influenced by a poorer quality of life of the megestrol acetate group at study initiation. There were no significant changes in quality of life scores over time between either of the study arms. CONCLUSION Megestrol acetate cannot be routinely recommended for all patients with small-cell lung cancer at the time of chemotherapy initiation. Rather, its therapeutic ratio may be more favorable for patients with problematic cancer anorexia/cachexia.

PURPOSE Hydrazine sulfate, an agent that appears to inhibit gluconeogenesis, has been studied in cancer patients for approximately 20 years. There was a recent resurgence of interest in this drug when subset analysis of a small placebo-controlled, double-blind, clinical trial reported improved survival among non-small-cell lung cancer patients with a good performance status who were randomized to receive this drug along with standard chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients on this trial had newly diagnosed, unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer and were treated with cisplatin and etoposide. In addition, they were randomized to receive hydrazine sulfate or placebo in a double-blind manner. RESULTS A total of 243 patients were randomized. Response rates were similar in the two treatment arms. There were trends for worse time to progression and survival in the hydrazine sulfate arm. No significant differences were noted in the two study arms with regard to toxicity or quality of life (QL). CONCLUSION This trial failed to demonstrate any benefit for patients who received hydrazine sulfate.