PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-5 (5)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  Implementing a Geriatric Assessment in Cooperative Group Clinical Cancer Trials: CALGB 360401 
Journal of Clinical Oncology  2011;29(10):1290-1296.
Purpose
Factors captured in a geriatric assessment can predict morbidity and mortality in older adults, but are not routinely measured in cancer clinical trials. This study evaluated the implementation of a geriatric assessment tool in the cooperative group setting.
Patients and Methods
Patients age ≥ 65 with cancer, who enrolled on cooperative group cancer trials, were eligible to enroll on Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 360401. They completed a geriatric assessment tool before initiation of protocol therapy, consisting of valid and reliable geriatric assessment measures which are primarily self-administered and require minimal resources and time by healthcare providers. The assessment measures functional status, comorbidity, cognitive function, psychological state, social support, and nutritional status. The protocol specified criteria for incorporation of the tool in future cooperative group trials was based on the time to completion and percent of patients who could complete their portion without assistance. Patient satisfaction with the tool was captured.
Results
Of the 93 patients who enrolled in this study, five (5%) met criteria for cognitive impairment and three did not complete the cognitive screen, leaving 85 assessable patients (median age, 72 years). The median time to complete the geriatric assessment tool was 22 minutes, 87% of patients (n = 74) completed their portion without assistance, 92% (n = 78) were satisfied with the questionnaire length, 95% (n = 81) reported no difficult questions, and 96% (n = 82) reported no upsetting questions. One hundred percent of health care professionals completed their portion.
Conclusion
This brief, primarily self-administered geriatric assessment tool met the protocol specified criteria for inclusion in future cooperative group clinical trials.
doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.30.6985
PMCID: PMC3083997  PMID: 21357782
2.  Phase I trial of weekly cisplatin, irinotecan and paclitaxel in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer 
Investigational new drugs  2008;27(4):366-373.
Summary
Objectives
To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), toxicities, and suitable dose for weekly 1-h paclitaxel combined with weekly cisplatin and irinotecan to treat advanced gastrointestinal malignancies.
Methods
Thirty patients with metastatic or locally advanced (unresectable or recurrent) gastrointestinal solid tumors were enrolled on this single-center, phase I study. Patients were treated with paclitaxel given over 1h at 1 of 4 dose levels (40, 50, 65, or 80 mg/m2). Paclitaxel was followed by fixed doses of cisplatin (30 mg/m2) and irinotecan (50 mg/m2). All treatment was administered sequentially, once a week, in 6-week cycles (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as a 2-week delay in treatment for grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicity, neutropenic fever, a 1-week delay for grade 4 hematologic toxicity, or a 2-week delay for grade 3 hematologic toxicity.
Results
Thirty patients were recruited; 28 patients were assessable for safety. Most of the patients (70%) had no prior chemotherapy. The primary first-cycle DLTs were neutropenia, diarrhea, and nausea. Paclitaxel at 65 mg/m2 was defined as the MTD. The most common grade 3–4 toxicities observed during all cycles were neutropenia (57%), febrile neutropenia (11%), diarrhea (29%), fatigue (29%), and nausea (18%). No patients had G-CSF (Neupogen, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA) support. Responses were observed in gastric, esophageal, and pancreatic cancers.
Conclusion
Paclitaxel at 65 mg/m2, cisplatin (30 mg/m2), and irinotecan (50 mg/m2) given weekly can be safely administered to patients with solid tumor malignancies. To improve cumulative toxicities, a schedule modification was required (3-week cycle; 2-on, 1-off) Neutropenia was the most common DLT. This combination showed substantial activity, particularly in patients with gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma, and phase II evaluation could be considered.
doi:10.1007/s10637-008-9194-4
PMCID: PMC3219507  PMID: 18956138
Cisplatin; Irinotecan; Paclitaxel; Phase I; Gastrointestinal cancer
3.  A phase I study of subcutaneously administered aflibercept (VEGF trap) in a new formulation in patients with advanced solid tumors 
Investigational New Drugs  2011;30(5):1958-1961.
Summary
Targeting angiogenesis is a valid anti-cancer strategy. Aflibercept is designed to sequester circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) by preventing VEGF from binding to its receptors. This phase I study was to evaluate a new formulation of subcutaneously administered aflibercept in patients with advanced solid tumors. Here we report our experience with the toxicity, pharmacokinetic profile and efficacy of the new 100 mg/mL subcutaneous (SC) formulation of aflibercept administered at a dose of at 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks.
doi:10.1007/s10637-011-9753-y
PMCID: PMC3432791  PMID: 22002018
Phase I study; Aflibercept; Angiogenesis inhibitor; Subcutaneously administration
4.  Phase I Study of Intravenous Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Trap, Aflibercept, in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors 
Journal of Clinical Oncology  2009;28(2):207-214.
Purpose
Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) Trap (aflibercept) is an angiogenesis inhibitor comprising portions of the extracellular domains of human VEGF receptors 1 and 2 fused to the Fc portion of human immunoglobulin G. This phase I study was designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of VEGF Trap administered intravenously (IV) every 2 weeks.
Patients and Methods
Patients with refractory solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with adequate organ function were eligible. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic markers included measurement of plasma VEGF bound to VEGF Trap and free VEGF Trap. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) was incorporated to measure the biologic effects of the drug on tumor vascularity and permeability.
Results
The study enrolled 47 patients at doses ranging from 0.3 to 7.0 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks. Dose-limiting toxicities were rectal ulceration and proteinuria at the 7.0 mg/kg dose. Other mechanism-specific toxicities included hypertension. On the basis of these observations and on pharmacokinetics, the recommended phase II dose of VEGF Trap as a single agent is 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Three RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) –defined partial responses were observed, one at the 3.0 mg/kg and two at the 7.0 mg/kg dose level. Maximum plasma concentration of free VEGF Trap increased proportionally with dose. Maximal VEGF-bound VEGF Trap complex levels were reached at doses ≥ 2.0 mg/kg. Changes in volume transfer constant measured by DCE-MRI at baseline and at 24 hours after administration indicate a possible dose-related change in this pharmacodynamic marker.
Conclusion
IV VEGF Trap was well tolerated at the dose levels tested. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic markers were indicative of VEGF blockade.
doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.22.9237
PMCID: PMC2815710  PMID: 19949018
5.  Distress in Older Patients With Cancer 
Journal of Clinical Oncology  2009;27(26):4346-4351.
Purpose
To determine the predictors of distress in older patients with cancer.
Patients and Methods
Patients age ≥ 65 years with a solid tumor or lymphoma completed a questionnaire that addressed these geriatric assessment domains: functional status, comorbidity, psychological state, nutritional status, and social support. Patients self-rated their level of distress on a scale of zero to 10 using a validated screening tool called the Distress Thermometer. The relationship between distress and geriatric assessment scores was examined.
Results
The geriatric assessment questionnaire was completed by 245 patients (mean age, 76 years; standard deviation [SD], 7 years; range, 65 to 95 years) with cancer (36% stage IV; 71% female). Of these, 87% also completed the Distress Thermometer, with 41% (n = 87) reporting a distress score of ≥ 4 on a scale of zero to 10 (mean score, 3; SD, 3; range, zero to 10). Bivariate analyses demonstrated an association between higher distress (≥ 4) and poorer physical function, increased comorbid medical conditions, poor eyesight, inability to complete the questionnaire alone, and requiring more time to complete the questionnaire. In a multivariate regression model based on the significant bivariate findings, poorer physical function (increased need for assistance with instrumental activities of daily living [P = .015] and lower physical function score on the Medical Outcomes Survey [P = .018]) correlated significantly with a higher distress score.
Conclusion
Significant distress was identified in 41% of older patients with cancer. Poorer physical function was the best predictor of distress. Further studies are needed to determine whether interventions that improve or assist with physical functioning can help to decrease distress in older adults with cancer.
doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.19.9463
PMCID: PMC2799049  PMID: 19652074

Results 1-5 (5)