Dataset Information

Dexamethasone to prevent everolimus-induced stomatitis (Alliance MIST Trial: A221701).

ABSTRACT: mTOR inhibitors such as everolimus may cause oral stomatitis, often a dose-limiting toxicity. Prior clinical research has suggested that a dexamethasone mouth rinse might help prevent and/or treat this. Alliance A221701 was a randomized phase III trial of patients initiating 10 mg daily oral everolimus that compared dexamethasone mouthwash taken preventively (initial dexamethasone group) versus therapeutically (initial placebo group) to assess two coprimary endpoints: the incidence of mTOR inhibitor-associated stomatitis (mIAS), and the area under the curve (AUC) of mIAS-associated pain over an 8-week treatment period. A Fisher's exact test was used to compare the incidences while a Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the AUCs. In addition, we performed an exploratory analysis of the association of everolimus trough concentrations and toxicity using a Mann-Whitney U test. Due to slow accrual, this study closed after 39 patients were randomized (19 to upfront placebo and 20 to upfront dexamethasone). There were no significant differences between groups seen in either of the coprimary endpoints; furthermore, we found no association between whole blood everolimus trough concentrations and toxicity. Although limited by poor enrollment, the results of this study do not suggest that prophylactic dexamethasone mouthwash is superior to therapeutic dexamethasone mouthwash (initiated at the first sign of mouth pain) for reducing the incidence or severity of mIAS from everolimus.

SUBMITTER: Ruddy KJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10247389 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb-Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dexamethasone to prevent everolimus-induced stomatitis (Alliance MIST Trial: A221701).

Ruddy Kathryn J KJ Zahrieh David D He Jun J Waechter Blake B Holleran Julianne L JL Lewis Lionel D LD Chow Selina S Beumer Jan J Weiss Matthias M Trikalinos Nikolaos N Faller Bryan B Lustberg Maryam M Rugo Hope S HS Loprinzi Charles C

Seminars in oncology 20230117 1-2

mTOR inhibitors such as everolimus may cause oral stomatitis, often a dose-limiting toxicity. Prior clinical research has suggested that a dexamethasone mouth rinse might help prevent and/or treat this. Alliance A221701 was a randomized phase III trial of patients initiating 10 mg daily oral everolimus that compared dexamethasone mouthwash taken preventively (initial dexamethasone group) versus therapeutically (initial placebo group) to assess two coprimary endpoints: the incidence of mTOR inhib ...[more]

PMID: 36693773

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo assess whether the rotation of dexamethasone to methylprednisolone decreases the intensity of dexamethasone-induced hiccup (DIH) in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy.Materials and methodsAdult patients who experienced DIH within 3 days after the administration of dexamethasone as an antiemetic were screened. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive dexamethasone (n = 33) or methylprednisolone (n = 32) as an antiemetic (randomization phase). In the next cycle of chemotherapy, the dexamethasone group received methylprednisolone and vice versa in the methylprednisolone group (crossover phase). The primary endpoint was the difference in hiccup intensity as measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS) between two groups.ResultsNo female patients were enrolled, although the study did not exclude them. At the randomization phase, hiccup frequency was 28/33 (84.8%) in the dexamethasone group versus 20/32 (62.5%) in the methylprednisolone group (p = .04). Intensity of hiccup was significantly higher in the dexamethasone group than that in the methylprednisolone group (mean NRS, 3.5 vs. 1.4, p < .001). At the crossover phase, hiccup intensity was further decreased after the rotation of dexamethasone to methylprednisolone in the dexamethasone group (mean NRS, 3.5 to 0.9, p < .001), while it was increased by rotating methylprednisolone to dexamethasone in the methylprednisolone group (mean NRS, 1.4 to 3.3, p = .025). There were no differences in emesis intensity between the two groups at either the randomization or crossover phases. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01974024.ConclusionDexamethasone-induced hiccup is a male-predominant phenomenon that can be ameliorated by rotating dexamethasone to methylprednisolone without compromising the antiemetic efficacy.Implications for practiceIn this randomized, multicenter, phase III trial, hiccup intensity was significantly lower when the antiemetic corticosteroid was rotated from dexamethasone to methylprednisolone without a change in emesis intensity than that when dexamethasone was maintained. At the crossover phase, hiccup intensity was increased again if dexamethasone was readministered instead of methylprednisolone. The present study demonstrated that dexamethasone-induced hiccup can be improved by rotating from dexamethasone to methylprednisolone without compromising its antiemetic efficacy.

Project description:BackgroundUrinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common bacterial infections in childhood and is associated with long-term complications. We aimed to assess the effect of adjuvant dexamethasone treatment on reducing kidney scarring after acute pyelonephritis (APN) in children.MethodsMulticenter, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial (RCT) where children from 1 month to 14 years of age with proven APN were randomly assigned to receive a 3-day course of either an intravenous corticosteroid (dexamethasone 0.30 mg per kg/day) twice daily or placebo. The late technetium 99 m-dimercaptosuric acid scintigraphy (> 6 months after acute episode) was performed to assess kidney scar persistence. Kidney scarring risk factors (vesicoureteral reflux, kidney congenital anomalies, or urinary tract dilatation) were also assessed.ResultsNinety-one participants completed the follow-up and were finally included (dexamethasone n = 49 and placebo n = 42). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Twenty participants showed persistent kidney scarring after > 6 months of follow-up without differences in incidence between groups (22% and 21% in the dexamethasone and placebo groups, p = 0.907). Renal damage severity in the early DMSA (β = 0.648, p = 0.023) and procalcitonin values (β = 0.065 p = 0.027) significantly modulated scar development. Vesicoureteral reflux grade showed a trend towards significance (β = 0.545, p = 0.054), but dexamethasone treatment showed no effect.ConclusionDexamethasone showed no effect on reducing the risk of scar formation in children with APN. Hence, there is no evidence for an adjuvant corticosteroid treatment recommendation in children with APN. However, the study was limited by not achieving the predicted sample size and the expected scar formation.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02034851. Registered in January 14, 2014. "A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information."

Project description:BackgroundDespite the success of immune checkpoint and targeted therapy, many patients with melanoma ultimately require further treatment. The combination of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab (CPB) has demonstrated promising activity in a single-arm study. In the current study, the authors performed a randomized phase 2 study to confirm efficacy and to determine whether adding everolimus would increase the activity of the combination.MethodsThrough the North Central Cancer Treatment Group, a total of 149 patients with unresectable AJCC 6th edition stage IV melanoma were randomized from May 2010 to May 2014 to either CPB or CPB with everolimus (CPBE). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS), response rate, and tolerability.ResultsThe CPB and CPBE treatment arms were balanced with regard to age (median age: 59 years vs 58 years) and high lactate dehydrogenase (48% vs 51%), but were unbalanced with regard to sex (male sex: 72% vs 55%; P = .03). Overall, there was no difference noted with regard to PFS, with a median PFS of 5.6 months for CPB versus 5.1 months for CPBE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.81-1.62 [P = .44]), or for OS, with a median OS of 14.5 months for CPB versus 10.8 months for CPBE (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.84-1.84). The confirmed response rate was 13% for CPB and 23% for CPBE (P = .13). Toxicity was higher for CPBE compared with CPB (83% for grade 3 + and 14% for grade 4 + vs 63% for grade 3 + and 11% for grade 4+, respectively) (toxicities were graded using the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]). Common grade 3 + toxicities were neutropenia, leukopenia, and fatigue, which occurred in both treatment arms with comparable frequency.ConclusionsBoth experimental arms demonstrated activity, with a PFS of >5 months. However, the addition of everolimus to CPB failed to improve outcomes, with increased toxicity noted. These findings replicate the moderate antitumor activity of CPB, with future development possibly in combination with targeted or immunotherapy. Cancer 2018;124:537-45. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Project description:LESSONS LEARNED:Everolimus does not have sufficient activity to justify its use as single agent in metastatic melanoma.Patients treated with 10 mg per day dose were most likely to require dose reductions.Everolimus appeared to reduce the numbers of regulatory T cells in approximately half of the treated patients; unfortunately, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND:Everolimus (RAD-001) is an orally active rapamycin analogue shown in preclinical data to produce cytostatic cell inhibition, which may be potentially beneficial in treating melanoma. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of everolimus in patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma (MM). METHODS:This study included two cohorts; cohort 1 received 30 mg of everolimus by mouth (PO) weekly, and cohort 2 was dosed with 10 mg of everolimus PO daily. The endpoints of the study were safety, 16-week progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and measures of immunomodulatory/antiangiogenic properties with therapy. Tumor samples before therapy and at week 8 of treatment were analyzed. Peripheral blood plasma or mononuclear cell isolates collected prior to therapy and at weeks 8 and 16 and at time of tumor progression were analyzed for vascular endothelial growth factor and regulatory T-cell (Treg) measurements. RESULTS:A total of 53 patients were enrolled in cohort 1 (n?=?24) and cohort 2 (n?=?29). Only 2 patients of the first 20 patients enrolled in cohort 2 had treatment responses (25%; 95% confidence interval, 8.6%-49.1%); this result did not allow full accrual to cohort 2, as the study was terminated for futility. Median OS was 12.2 months for cohort 1 versus 8.1 months in cohort 2; no PFS advantage was seen in either group (2.1 months vs. 1.8 months). Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 4 myocardial ischemia (3.4%); grade 3 fatigue, mucositis, and hyperglycemia (10.3%); and anorexia and anemia (6.9%). Everolimus significantly reduced the number of Tregs in approximately half of the treated patients; however, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION:Everolimus does not have sufficient single-agent activity in MM; however, we have identified evidence of biological activity to provide a potential rationale for future combination studies.

Dataset Information

Dexamethasone to prevent everolimus-induced stomatitis (Alliance MIST Trial: A221701).

Publications

Dexamethasone to prevent everolimus-induced stomatitis (Alliance MIST Trial: A221701).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets