Search

BackgroundStandard therapy for glioblastoma includes surgery, radiotherapy, and temozolomide. This Phase 3 trial evaluates the addition of an autologous tumor lysate-pulsed dendritic cell vaccine (DCVax®-L) to standard therapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma.MethodsAfter surgery and chemoradiotherapy, patients were randomized (2:1) to receive temozolomide plus DCVax-L (n = 232) or temozolomide and placebo (n = 99). Following recurrence, all patients were allowed to receive DCVax-L, without unblinding. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS); the secondary endpoint was overall survival (OS).ResultsFor the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n = 331), median OS (mOS) was 23.1 months from surgery. Because of the cross-over trial design, nearly 90% of the ITT population received DCVax-L. For patients with methylated MGMT (n = 131), mOS was 34.7 months from surgery, with a 3-year survival of 46.4%. As of this analysis, 223 patients are ≥ 30 months past their surgery date; 67 of these (30.0%) have lived ≥ 30 months and have a Kaplan-Meier (KM)-derived mOS of 46.5 months. 182 patients are ≥ 36 months past surgery; 44 of these (24.2%) have lived ≥ 36 months and have a KM-derived mOS of 88.2 months. A population of extended survivors (n = 100) with mOS of 40.5 months, not explained by known prognostic factors, will be analyzed further. Only 2.1% of ITT patients (n = 7) had a grade 3 or 4 adverse event that was deemed at least possibly related to the vaccine. Overall adverse events with DCVax were comparable to standard therapy alone.ConclusionsAddition of DCVax-L to standard therapy is feasible and safe in glioblastoma patients, and may extend survival. Trial registration Funded by Northwest Biotherapeutics; Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00045968; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00045968?term=NCT00045968&rank=1 ; initially registered 19 September 2002.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported an error in the spelling of one of the author names. In this Correction the incorrect and correct author names are indicated and the author name has been updated in the original publication. The authors also reported an error in the Methods section of the original article. In this Correction the incorrect and correct versions of the affected sentence are indicated. The original article has not been updated with regards to the error in the Methods section.

Purpose: This project evaluated the dietary supplement (DS) use of patients referred to an integrative oncology program and documented the frequency and reasons for recommending stopping DS. Many patients with cancer are taking dietary supplements and may not disclose such to their care teams. There is potential for harm in several ways: (1) interactions with their medications that may increase side effects, (2) interactions with their treatment that may lead to decreased efficacy, and 3) direct toxicity from the supplement. Methods: Patient data (N = 100) were collected prospectively from an Integrative Oncology Clinic. The number and type of DS were documented. Using the Natural Medicines Database, we determined whether supplements interacted with the patient’s other medications or cancer therapies. We calculated the percentage of patients in which a recommendation for discontinuation (DC) of DS was provided, along with the supporting reasons. Results: We found that 91% of patients took DS, averaging 5.5 per patient (range 0–20). In 35% of patients, we recommended stopping some of their DS or other therapies, the reasons being: DC antioxidants, vitamin B12/iron while on chemo/RT (unless deficient or part of protocol) 32%; DC due to taking excess amounts (i.e., fat-soluble vitamins, calcium, iron) 13.5%; DC supplements with known toxicity (i.e., laetrile, Miracle mineral solution) 13.5%; DC due to interactions with other medications (i.e., anticoagulants) 13.5%; DC DS with potential to increase cancer growth (i.e., estrogenic potential in those with hormone-sensitive cancers, glutamine) 11%; DC due to potential for increased toxicity with chemotherapy (i.e., increased risk of bleeding, CIPN) 11%; DC probiotics, immune stimulants, and cannabis while on immunotherapy 5.4%. Conclusions: Patients with cancer referred to an integrative oncology clinic use large numbers of DS with the potential for adverse effects and/or decreasing efficacy of treatments. This study highlights the prevalence of DS usage in cancer patients referred to an integrative oncology clinic and demonstrates the need for counseling about safe supplement use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stress is ubiquitous in our modern society and contributes to many disease states. This narrative review describes the effect of stress/distress on cancer development and progression. Seminal randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and distress management guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and the Society for Integrative LinearOncology (SIO) are highlighted. We describe the physiological effects of distress, distress assessment, and management. Psychological treatments are summarized. Evidence-based lifestyle modifications and integrative therapies are reviewed in detail, including mindfulness-based techniques, yoga, guided imagery, breathing techniques, hypnosis, exercise, music therapy, qigong/Tai Chi, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing, and improving sleep and heart rate variability. Recognition and treatment of distress can improve quality of life. More research is needed to determine the effects of managing distress on cancer outcomes, as well as the best type and duration of intervention, noting that the benefits of interventions may be specific for patients with different cancer types., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Dr Markovic has research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s).)

Purpose: This project evaluated the dietary supplement (DS) use of patients referred to an integrative oncology program and documented the frequency and reasons for recommending stopping DS. Many patients with cancer are taking dietary supplements and may not disclose such to their care teams. There is potential for harm in several ways: (1) interactions with their medications that may increase side effects, (2) interactions with their treatment that may lead to decreased efficacy, and 3) direct toxicity from the supplement., Methods: Patient data (N = 100) were collected prospectively from an Integrative Oncology Clinic. The number and type of DS were documented. Using the Natural Medicines Database, we determined whether supplements interacted with the patient's other medications or cancer therapies. We calculated the percentage of patients in which a recommendation for discontinuation (DC) of DS was provided, along with the supporting reasons., Results: We found that 91% of patients took DS, averaging 5.5 per patient (range 0-20). In 35% of patients, we recommended stopping some of their DS or other therapies, the reasons being: DC antioxidants, vitamin B12/iron while on chemo/RT (unless deficient or part of protocol) 32%; DC due to taking excess amounts (i.e., fat-soluble vitamins, calcium, iron) 13.5%; DC supplements with known toxicity (i.e., laetrile, Miracle mineral solution) 13.5%; DC due to interactions with other medications (i.e., anticoagulants) 13.5%; DC DS with potential to increase cancer growth (i.e., estrogenic potential in those with hormone-sensitive cancers, glutamine) 11%; DC due to potential for increased toxicity with chemotherapy (i.e., increased risk of bleeding, CIPN) 11%; DC probiotics, immune stimulants, and cannabis while on immunotherapy 5.4%., Conclusions: Patients with cancer referred to an integrative oncology clinic use large numbers of DS with the potential for adverse effects and/or decreasing efficacy of treatments. This study highlights the prevalence of DS usage in cancer patients referred to an integrative oncology clinic and demonstrates the need for counseling about safe supplement use., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)