Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Charles L Loprinzi

Publications and source records attributed to Charles L Loprinzi.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Phase III trial of gabapentin alone or in conjunction with an antidepressant in the management of hot flashes in women who have inadequate control with an antidepressant alone: NCCTG N03C5.

PURPOSE: Despite the utility of newer antidepressants for alleviating hot flashes, antidepressants do not work adequately enough in many patients. Gabapentin is a nonhormonal agent that also can reduce hot flashes. No data have been available to address whether the combination of both agents would more effectively alleviate hot flashes, compared with gabapentin alone, in patients with inadequate hot flash control with an antidepressant alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a randomized trial in which 118 patients with inadequate hot flash control on an antidepressant were randomly assigned to receive both an antidepressant and gabapentin versus being weaned off the antidepressant and receiving gabapentin alone. Patients were observed for 5 weeks (including a baseline week in which patients continued on their current antidepressant without gabapentin) during which time they completed validated daily hot flash diaries. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients provided complete data at the 5-week assessment. Regardless of whether or not the antidepressant was continued when gabapentin was started, there was an approximately 50% median reduction in hot flash frequencies (54%; 95% CI, 34% to 70% for combined treatment v 49%; 95% CI, 26% to 58% for gabapentin alone) and scores (56%; 95% CI, 26% to 71% for combined treatment v 60%; 95% CI, 33% to 73% for gabapentin alone). CONCLUSION: Gabapentin seems to decrease hot flashes by approximately 50% in women with inadequate hot flash control who were using an antidepressant. This study saw no significant additional hot flash reduction from continuation of the antidepressant.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Whose opinion counts?

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed2006

Phase III double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial of black cohosh in the management of hot flashes: NCCTG Trial N01CC1.

PURPOSE: Hot flashes can cause significant morbidity in postmenopausal women undergoing or finished with breast cancer treatment. Black cohosh has been used to treat hot flashes, but definitive clinical data about efficacy have been equivocal. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, cross-over clinical trial with two 4-week periods, was used to study the efficacy of black cohosh (1 capsule, Cimicifuga racemosa 20 mg BID) for the treatment of hot flashes in women. Participants kept a daily hot flash diary during a baseline week and then during two 4-week crossover treatment periods. Hot flash scores were measured by assigning points (1 to 4 for mild to very severe) to each hot flash based on severity and then adding the points for a given time period. RESULTS: Between October 31, 2003, to March 4, 2004, 132 patients were randomly assigned. Toxicity was minimal and not different by treatment group. Patients receiving black cohosh reported a mean decrease in hot flash score of 20% (comparing the fourth treatment week to the baseline week) compared with a 27% decrease for patients on placebo (P = .53). Mean hot flash frequency was reduced 17% on black cohosh and 26% on placebo (P = .36). Patient treatment preferences were measured after completion of both treatment periods by ascertaining which treatment period, if any, the patient preferred. Thirty-four percent of patients preferred the black cohosh treatment, 38% preferred the placebo, and 28% did not prefer either treatment. CONCLUSION: This trial failed to provide any evidence that black cohosh reduced hot flashes more than the placebo.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Phase III study of two different dosing schedules of erythropoietin in anemic patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare maintenance epoetin alfa administered once every 3 weeks with continued weekly epoetin alfa for patients with cancer-associated anemia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned at enrollment to receive three weekly doses of epoetin alfa 40,000 U subcutaneously (SC), followed by either standard weekly epoetin alfa (40K arm) or 120,000 U of epoetin alfa (120K arm) SC every 3 weeks for 18 additional weeks. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-five patients were enrolled. One hundred eighty-three patients were assigned to the 40K arm, and 182 were assigned to the 120K arm. There was no difference in the proportion of patients requiring transfusions during the study (23% in 40K arm and 18% in 120K arm, P = .22) or specifically during the maintenance phase (13% in 40K arm v 15% in 120K arm, P = .58). Patients randomly assigned to the 40K arm were more likely to have a > or = 2 or > or = 3 g/dL hemoglobin (Hb) increment, were more likely to have a drug dose held because of high Hb, and had higher mean end-of-study Hb levels. Toxicities, including thromboembolism, and overall survival were similar. Patients in the 40K arm had a higher global quality of life (QOL) at baseline for unclear reasons, whereas patients in the 120K arm had a greater global QOL improvement during the study, so end-of-study QOL was equivalent. CONCLUSION: After three weekly doses of epoetin alfa 40,000 U, a dose of 120,000 U can be administered safely once every 3 weeks without increasing transfusion needs or sacrificing QOL. The Hb increment is somewhat greater with continued weekly epoetin alfa. Lack of blinding as a result of different treatment schedules may have confounded results.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Phase III comparison of depomedroxyprogesterone acetate to venlafaxine for managing hot flashes: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial N99C7.

PURPOSE: Vasomotor hot flashes are a common problem in menopausal women. Given concerns regarding estrogen and/or combined hormonal therapy, other treatment options are desired. Prior trials have confirmed that progestational agents and newer antidepressants effectively reduce hot flashes. This current trial compared a single intramuscular dose of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), depot preparation, versus daily oral venlafaxine as treatment for hot flashes. METHODS: Women with bothersome hot flashes were entered onto this trial, were randomly assigned to treatment, and then had a baseline week where hot flash scores were recorded without treatment. They were then treated and observed for 6 weeks; daily diaries were used to measure hot flash frequencies and severities. There were 109 patients per each arm randomly assigned to receive MPA 400 mg intramuscularly for a single dose versus venlafaxine 37.5 mg per day for a week, then 75 mg per day. RESULTS: During the sixth week after random assignment, hot flash scores were reduced by 55% in the venlafaxine arm versus 79% in the MPA arm (P < .0001). In an intention-to-treat analysis, 46% of venlafaxine patients (50 of 109) compared with 74% of the MPA patients (81 of 109) had a decrease in hot flashes by more than 50% from baseline (P < .0001). Less toxicity was reported in the MPA arm. CONCLUSION: A single MPA dose seems to be well tolerated and more effectively reduces hot flashes than does venlafaxine.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2006

Pilot evaluation of bupropion for the treatment of hot flashes.

Bupropion is commonly used in the treatment of nicotine dependence and depression, and in most people, does not cause sexual dysfunction, weight gain, or sedation. Given its attractive side effect profile, the efficacy of other newer antidepressants against hot flashes and anecdotal observations of resolution of hot flashes in some patients taking bupropion for nicotine dependence, it was decided to explore its clinical activity as a hot flash remedy in a pilot study. Between January 1999 and October 2004, 21 patients (7 men and 14 women) were enrolled in the study. Self-completed daily hot flash diaries were used to document the frequency and severity of hot flashes at baseline (week 1) and during the treatment period (weeks 2 through 5). Participants received bupropion 150 mg every morning for the first 3 days and then 150 mg twice per day for a total of 4 weeks. One woman did not provide any hot flash information and was excluded from the analysis. Five women could not complete the study because of side effects. The study did not show a reduction in hot flash frequency and/or severity significantly higher than what would be expected with a placebo. Even though the sample size was small, these results are consistent with bupropion's mechanism of action (norepinephrine reuptake inhibition without serotonergic effects) and what it is now hypothesized about the pathophysiology of hot flashes (increased noradrenergic activity and decreased serotonergic activity). These data suggest that bupropion should not be further investigated as a remedy for hot flashes.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Peptide vaccination of patients with metastatic melanoma: improved clinical outcome in patients demonstrating effective immunization.

OBJECTIVES: Therapeutic peptide vaccines for melanoma continue to only demonstrate anecdotal success. We set out to evaluate the impact of low-dose GM-CSF emulsified in Montanide ISA-51 on the immunogenicity of HLA-A2 restricted melanoma differentiation antigen peptide vaccines (MART-1, gp100 and tyrosinase) administered in separate subcutaneous injections. METHODS: We conducted a randomized phase II clinical trial of HLA-A2+ patients with metastatic melanoma that were immunized every 3 weeks with one of the following vaccine preparations: (A) peptides + Montanide ISA-51; (B) peptides + Montanide ISA-51 + GM-CSF (10 microg); (C) peptides + Montanide ISA-51 + GM-CSF (50 microg). Immunization efficacy was determined by quantification of vaccine specific tetramer positive cytotoxic T cells in peripheral blood. Global assessment of immune competence was ascertained using DTH testing to common recall antigens as well as peripheral blood immunophenotyping. RESULTS: Twenty-five eligible patients were equally distributed across all 3 treatment groups. Only 9 patients demonstrated evidence of immunization. Most commonly, immune response was achieved to the gp100 peptide. The addition of low-dose GM-CSF did not impact immunization efficacy. DTH reactivity to Candida appeared predictive of successful immunization. Successful immunization with the peptide vaccines was associated with improved clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of low dose GM-CSF to peptide vaccines did not enhance immunogenicity. Higher doses of GM-CSF may be needed to achieve this effect and this is a testable hypothesis. Likewise, better patient selection based on immunologic status (DTH reactivity) may be helpful to better understand the clinical impact of therapeutic cancer vaccines.

Adjuvants, Immunologic↗
PubMed2006

Low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with advanced cancer: a phase 3 clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess whether low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) provides a survival benefit in patients with advanced cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 1998 and June 2001, we performed a randomized controlled study of patients with advanced cancer. Initially, the study was double blinded and placebo controlled, with the patients receiving daily injections of 5000 U of LMWH or saline. However, because of low accrual midway through the study, the placebo injection arm was eliminated, and the study became open labeled, with patients receiving either LMWH injections plus standard clinical care or standard clinical care alone. The primary study end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Of 141 patients randomized to this clinical trial, 3 dropped out, leaving 138 patients. The median survival time was 10.5 months (95% confidence interval, 7.6-12.2 months) for the combined standard care and placebo groups. The median survival time for the combined LMWH arms was 7.3 months (95% confidence interval, 4.8-12.2 months). These median survival times were not significantly different (log-rank P = .46). The median survival times for the blinded and unblinded LMWH groups were 6.2 months and 9.0 months, respectively. The median survival times were 10.3 months for the blinded placebo arm and 10.5 months for the standard care arm. The rate of severe or life-threatening venous thromboembolism was 6% in the LMWH arms and 7% in the control arms. The rate of severe or life-threatening bleeding was 3% in the LMWH arms and 7% in the control arms.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Centrally active nonhormonal hot flash therapies.

Given the problems associated with hormonal therapy, and the prominent problem of hot flashes in menopausal women, there is a need for nonhormonal agents to alleviate hot flashes. Several compounds that appear to act on the central nervous system have been investigated. Potential mechanisms for their effects on hot flashes have been described. Bellergal (no longer available on the US market, where it was known as Bellergal-S), a combination preparation sedative that consists of low-dose phenobarbital, ergotamine tartrate, and levorotatory alkaloids of belladonna, is an old agent that was popular approximately 20 years ago; however, there is limited suggestion of efficacy for this agent. Clonidine, an older antihypertensive drug, is another centrally active agent that has been studied. Randomized trials have demonstrated that it clearly works for reducing hot flashes, but the magnitude of efficacy is somewhat limited. Toxicity from this agent limits its utility in the clinic. Methyldopa is another centrally active agent that has been studied but to a more limited degree. It appears to have minimal efficacy and too much toxicity to make it clinically useful. Anecdotal observations from a number of sources suggested that newer antidepressants can alleviate hot flashes. This led to pilot trials of venlafaxine and paroxetine, with results suggesting benefit from both drugs. Subsequently, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials of venlafaxine, paroxetine, and fluoxetine were conducted. All 3 of these clinical trials demonstrated statistically significant reductions in hot flashes with these newer antidepressants compared with placebo. Pilot trials of citalopram and mirtazapine, 2 other newer antidepressants, have also suggested efficacy. Toxicity evaluations have suggested that these agents are, again, well tolerated by the majority of patients. A recent trial, however, was unable to demonstrate any benefit for fluoxetine or citalopram over a placebo. Anecdotal observations also suggested that gabapentin was helpful for alleviating hot flashes. This led to pilot trials that again suggested efficacy. Subsequently, 2 large placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical trials were conducted. Both of these demonstrated statistically significant efficacy for gabapentin compared with a placebo. This drug is relatively well tolerated by most patients. Thus, centrally active nonhormonal agents clearly do decrease hot flashes in women. The most efficacious and clinically appropriate agents for use are newer antidepressants and gabapentin. Continued evaluation of the efficacy and toxicity of these agents is ongoing.

Amines↗
PubMed2005

Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline.

PURPOSE: To update the 2000 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on colorectal cancer surveillance. RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on results from three independently reported meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that compared low-intensity and high-intensity programs of colorectal cancer surveillance, and on recent analyses of data from major clinical trials in colon and rectal cancer, the Panel recommends annual computed tomography (CT) of the chest and abdomen for 3 years after primary therapy for patients who are at higher risk of recurrence and who could be candidates for curative-intent surgery; pelvic CT scan for rectal cancer surveillance, especially for patients with several poor prognostic factors, including those who have not been treated with radiation; colonoscopy at 3 years after operative treatment, and, if results are normal, every 5 years thereafter; flexible proctosigmoidoscopy [corrected] every 6 months for 5 years for rectal cancer patients who have not been treated with pelvic radiation; history and physical examination every 3 to 6 months for the first 3 years, every 6 months during years 4 and 5, and subsequently at the discretion of the physician; and carcinoembryonic antigen every 3 months postoperatively for at least 3 years after diagnosis, if the patient is a candidate for surgery or systemic therapy. Chest x-rays, CBCs, and liver function tests are not recommended, and molecular or cellular markers should not influence the surveillance strategy based on available evidence.

Biomarkers, Tumor↗
PubMed2005

The prevalence of weight concerns in a smoking abstinence clinical trial.

Recent research has demonstrated there is a high prevalence of weight concerns in smokers and that smokers with weight concerns may respond poorly to treatment for tobacco dependence. Most studies have focused only on females or have consisted of small samples. In this study of a 12-week randomized trial of nicotine inhaler, bupropion or both for smoking cessation, 50% of the 1012 female smokers and 26% of the 680 male smokers, at study entry, were weight concerned. In examining the impact of weight concerns on the 12-week point-prevalence smoking abstinence, 26% of non-weight-concerned smokers quit smoking compared to 22% of weight-concerned smokers (p=0.06). This study, which includes a large sample of both genders, provides further evidence that approximately half of females who are seeking smoking cessation treatment are weight concerned and that one quarter of male smokers are weight concerned. Additionally, being weight concerned may impact the short-term success rates of stopping smoking using pharmacotherapy.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Evaluation of shark cartilage in patients with advanced cancer: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group trial.

BACKGROUND: Shark cartilage has been a popular complementary or alternative medicine intervention. The basis for this popularity is the claim that sharks rarely get cancer because of the high proportion of cartilage in the shark's body. However, early studies were equivocal. Therefore, a clinical trial was conducted to look at the impact of shark cartilage in patients with advanced cancer. The primary goal of this trial was to determine whether a shark cartilage product improved overall survival for patients with advanced cancer who were getting standard care. Secondary research goals were to evaluate toxicities, tolerability, and quality of life associated with this shark cartilage product. METHODS: The study was a two-arm, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, clinical trial. Patients with incurable breast or colorectal carcinoma had to have good performance status and organ function. Patients could be receiving chemotherapy. Patients were all to receive standard care and then to be randomly selected to receive either a shark cartilage product or an identical-appearing and smelling placebo 3 to 4 times each day. RESULTS: Data on a total of 83 evaluable patients were analyzed. There was no difference in overall survival between patients receiving standard care plus a shark cartilage product versus standard care plus placebo. Likewise, there was no suggestion of improvement in quality of life for patients receiving the shark cartilage, compared with those receiving placebo. CONCLUSION: This trial was unable to demonstrate any suggestion of efficacy for this shark cartilage product in patients with advanced cancer.

Aged↗