JE 2nd, Dewhirst MW. Effect of aerobic exercise on tumor physiology in an animal model of human breast cancer.
Context-Hope may be important in explaining the variability in how patients adjust to lung cancer.Objectives-The aim of this study was to examine how hope, as conceptualized by Snyder and colleagues, is associated with multiple indices of adjustment to lung cancer. This theoretical model of hope suggests that people with high levels of hope are able to think about the pathways to goals (pathways) and feel confident that they can pursue those pathways to reach their goals (agency).Methods-We hypothesized that higher levels of hope, as measured by Snyder et al.'s hope scale, would be related to lower levels of pain and other lung cancer symptoms (i.e., fatigue, cough) and lower psychological distress (i.e., depression). Participants in this study included patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer (n = 51). All participants provided demographic and medical information and completed measures of hope, lung cancer symptoms, and psychological distress.Results-Data analyses found that hope was inversely associated with major symptoms of cancer (i.e., pain, fatigue, cough) and psychological distress (i.e., depression), even after accounting for important demographic and medical variables (i.e., age, cancer stage). Conclusion-The findings of this cross-sectional study highlight the potential importance of hope in understanding adjustment to lung cancer. Future longitudinal research could help reveal how hope and adjustment interact over the course of cancer survivorship.
Background Early phase clinical trials evaluate the safety and efficacy of new treatments. The exclusion/inclusion criteria in these trials are usually rigorous and may exclude many patients seen in clinical practice. Our objective was to study the comorbidities limiting the participation of patients with breast, colorectal, or lung cancer in clinical trials. Materials and Methods We queried http://clinicaltrials.gov on December 31, 2016. We reviewed the eligibility criteria of 1,103 trials. Logistic regression analyses were completed, and exclusion was studied as a binary variable. Results Out of 1,103 trials, 70 trials (6%) excluded patients >75 years of age, and 45% made no reference to age. Eighty‐six percent of trials placed restrictions on patients with history of prior malignancies. Regarding central nervous system (CNS) metastasis, 416 trials (38%) excluded all patients with CNS metastasis, and 373 (34%) only allowed asymptomatic CNS metastasis. Regarding chronic viral infections, 347 trials (31%) excluded all patients with human immunodeficiency virus, and 228 trials (21%) excluded all patients with hepatitis B or C infection. On univariate analysis, chemotherapy trials were more likely to exclude patients with CNS metastasis and history of other malignancies than targeted therapy trials. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that industry‐sponsored trials had higher odds of excluding patients with compromised liver function. Conclusion Many clinical trials excluded large segments of the population of patients with cancer. Frequent exclusion criteria included patients with CNS metastasis, history of prior malignancies, and chronic viral infections. The criteria for participation in some clinical trials may be overly restrictive and limit enrollment. Implications for Practice The results of this study revealed that most early phase clinic trials contain strict exclusion criteria, potentially excluding the patients who may be more likely to represent the population treated in clinical settings, leaving patients susceptible to unintended harm from inappropriate generalization of trial results. Careful liberalization of the inclusion/exclusion criteria in clinical trials will allow investigators to understand the benefits and drawbacks of the experimental drug for a broader population, and possibly improve recruitment of patients with cancer into clinical trials.
e16268 Background: The multi-kinase inhibitor sorafenib (S) and HDAC inhibitor vorinostat (V) demonstrated synergism against preclinincal pancreatic cancer (PaCa) models. The combination of S & V also potently radiosensitized pancreatic cancer cells and enhanced the activity of gemcitabine (G). This led to a phase 1 trial to determine the doses and schedule appropriate for phase 2 study of S & V with weekly G and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) as neoadjuvant treatment of PaCa following chemotherapy. Methods: Using a 3+3 dose-escalation design, adult patients with resectable, borderline resectable, unresectable, and lymph node positive PaCa were enrolled to 6 dose levels. Enrolled patients had completed at least 8w of neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to IMRT. The schedule of administration was weekly 200mg/m2 G weekly during IMRT, S & V were dosed either 3x or 5x weekly during IMRT. Primary endpoint was to identify the dose and schedule for S & V with G based chemoradiation. Key secondary endpoints included antitumor activity, R0 resection rate, OS. Correlative studies to evaluate a variety of biomarkers and Nanostring expression analysis on pre- and post-therapy tumor specimens were also performed. Results: 22 patients were enrolled and 21 treated at 6 dose levels. Due to thrombocytopenia limiting drug exposure, the trial was modified to reduce G to 200mg/m2/wk and S & V to 3 d/wk instead of 5 d/wk. 13 patients were eligible for surgery, and 9 had R0 resections. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the study regimen was well tolerated, typical toxicities of S (hand foot syndrome) were not observed with intermittent dosing. Uncomplicated cytopenias limited drug exposure, which was improved with intermittent S&V dosing. The RP2D of the combination is S (400mg po BID 3d/wk), V (200mg po qd 3d/wk), G 200mg/m2 IV weekly, with IMRT (50.4 Gy over 28 fractions, 5d/wk). Antitumor activity was observed across dose levels, with an encouraging R0 resection rate. These results warrant further investigation of combining S and V with G and IMRT as neoadjuvant treatment of PaCa following chemotherapy. Analyses of correlative studies and OS are underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02349867. [Table: see text]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.