A randomized phase II study of paclitaxel with carboplatin +/- amifostine as first line treatment in advanced ovarian carcinoma

The Therapeutic Potential of Antioxidants in Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: Evidence from Preclinical and Clinical Studies

As cancer therapies advance and patient survival improves, there has been growing concern about the long-term adverse effects that patients may experience following treatment, and concerns have been raised about such persistent, progressive, and often irreversible adverse effects. Chemotherapy is a potentially life-extending treatment, and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is one of its most common long-term toxicities. At present, strategies for the prevention and treatment of CIPN are still an open problem faced by medicine, and there has been a large amount of previous evidence that oxidative damage is involved in the process of CIPN. In this review, we focus on the lines of defense involving antioxidants that exert the effect of inhibiting CIPN. We also provide an update on the targets and clinical prospects of different antioxidants (melatonin, N-acetylcysteine, vitamins, α-lipoic acid, mineral elements, phytochemicals, nutritional antioxidants, cytoprotectants and synthetic compounds) in the treatment of CIPN with the help of preclinical and clinical studies, emphasizing the great potential of antioxidants as adjuvant strategies to mitigate CIPN.

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and rehabilitation: A review

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common complication after chemotherapy that can damage the sensory, motor, autonomic, or cranial nerves in approximately 30%-60% of patients with cancer. CIPN can lead to detrimental dose modifications and/or premature chemotherapy discontinuation due to patient intolerance. The long-term impact of CIPN is particularly challenging and can have a profound impact on the quality of life (QoL) and survivorship. However, this condition is often underdiagnosed. No agents have been established to prevent CIPN. Pre-chemotherapy testing is recommended for high-risk patients. Duloxetine is considered a first-line treatment, whereas gabapentin, pregabalin, tricyclic antidepressants, and topical compounding creams may be used for neuropathic pain control. Home-based, low-to-moderate walking, and resistance exercise during chemotherapy can reduce the severity and prevalence of CIPN symptoms, especially in older patients. Pre-habilitation and rehabilitation should be recommended for all patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapies. The purpose of this article is to review common chemotherapeutic drugs causing CIPN, risk factors, diagnosis and treatment of CIPN, and evidence of the benefits of rehabilitation.

Association between Low-Grade Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CINP) and Survival in Patients with Metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreas

The combination of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine demonstrated greater efficacy than gemcitabine alone but resulted in higher rates of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CINP) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). We aimed to evaluate the correlation between the development of treatment-related peripheral neuropathy and the efficacy of nab-P/Gem combination in these patients. mPC patients treated with nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m² and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² as a first-line therapy were included. Treatment-related adverse events, mainly peripheral neuropathy, were categorized using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria scale, version 4.02. Efficacy outcomes, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PSF), and disease control rate (DCR), were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier model. A total of 153 patients were analyzed; of these, 47 patients (30.7%) developed grade 1–2 neuropathy. PFS was 7 months (95% CI (6–7 months)) for patients with grade 1–2 neuropathy and 6 months (95% CI (5–6 months)) for patients without peripheral neuropathy (p = 0.42). Median OS was 13 months (95% CI (10–18 months)) and 10 months (95% CI (8–13 months)) in patients with and without peripheral neuropathy, respectively (p = 0.04). DCR was achieved by 83% of patients with grade 1–2 neuropathy and by 58% of patients without neuropathy (p = 0.03). In the multivariate analysis, grade 1–2 neuropathy was independently associated with OS (HR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45–0.98; p = 0.03). nab-P/Gem represents an optimal first-line treatment for mPC patients. Among possible treatment-related adverse events, peripheral neuropathy is the most frequent, with different grades and incidence. Our study suggests that patients experiencing CINP may have a more favorable outcome, with a higher disease control rate and prolonged median survival compared to those without neuropathy.

Amifostine protects from the peripheral sensory neuropathy induced by oxaliplatin in mice

Sensory neuropathy is a dose-limiting side effect of oxaliplatin-based cancer treatment. This study investigated the antinociceptive effect of amifostine and its potential neuroprotective mechanisms on the oxaliplatin-related peripheral sensory neuropathy in mice. Oxaliplatin (1 mg/kg) was injected intravenously in Swiss albino male mice twice a week (total of nine injections), while amifostine (1, 5, 25, 50, and 100 mg/kg) was administered subcutaneously 30 min before oxaliplatin. Mechanical and thermal nociceptive tests were performed once a week for 49 days. Additionally, c-Fos, nitrotyrosine, and activating transcription factor 3 (ATF3) immunoexpressions were assessed in the dorsal root ganglia. In all doses, amifostine prevented the development of mechanical hyperalgesia and thermal allodynia induced by oxaliplatin (P<0.05). Amifostine at the dose of 25 mg/kg provided the best protection (P<0.05). Moreover, amifostine protected against neuronal hyperactivation, nitrosative stress, and neuronal damage in the dorsal root ganglia, detected by the reduced expression of c-Fos, nitrotyrosine, and ATF3 (P<0.05 vs the oxaliplatin-treated group). In conclusion, amifostine reduced the nociception induced by oxaliplatin in mice, suggesting the possible use of amifostine for the management of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral sensory neuropathy.

Neurotoxicity of antineoplastic drugs: Mechanisms, susceptibility, and neuroprotective strategies

This review summarizes the adverse effects on the central and/or peripheral nervous systems that may occur in response to antineoplastic drugs. In particular, we describe the neurotoxic side effects of the most commonly used drugs, such as platinum compounds, doxorubicin, ifosfamide, 5-fluorouracil, vinca alkaloids, taxanes, methotrexate, bortezomib and thalidomide. Neurotoxicity may result from direct action of compounds on the nervous system or from metabolic alterations produced indirectly by these drugs, and either the central nervous system or the peripheral nervous system, or both, may be affected. The incidence and severity of neurotoxicity are principally related to the dose, to the duration of treatment, and to the dose intensity, though other factors, such as age, concurrent pathologies, and genetic predisposition may enhance the occurrence of side effects. To avoid or reduce the onset and severity of these neurotoxic effects, the use of neuroprotective compounds and/or strategies may be helpful, thereby enhancing the therapeutic effectiveness of antineoplastic drug.

Chemotherapy Resistance in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients

Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common gynaecologic malignancy seen in women. Majority of the patients with ovarian cancer are diagnosed at the advanced stage making prognosis poor. The standard management of advanced ovarian cancer includes tumour debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy. Various types of chemotherapeutic regimens have been used to treat advanced ovarian cancer, but the most promising and the currently used standard first-line treatment is carboplatin and paclitaxel. Despite improved clinical response and survival to this combination of chemotherapy, numerous patients either undergo relapse or succumb to the disease as a result of chemotherapy resistance. To understand this phenomenon at a cellular level, various macromolecules such as DNA, messenger RNA and proteins have been developed as biomarkers for chemotherapy response. This review comprehensively summarizes the problem that pertains to chemotherapy resistance in advanced ovarian cancer and provides a good overview of the various biomarkers that have been developed in this field.

Efficacy of Drug Interventions for Chemotherapy-Induced Chronic Peripheral Neurotoxicity: A Network Meta-analysis

Peripheral neurotoxicity is a disturbing issue for cancer patients who are treated with chemotherapy. Several medications have been developed for preventing chemotherapy-induced chronic neurotoxicity (CICNT) however; their relative efficacies have not yet been studied. In this study, we conducted a network meta-analysis to give intervention recommendations. The literature was searched in a variety of databases and eligible studies were chosen based on predefined criteria. Data extraction and statistical analysis was performed, and the results are displayed using the odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrI) with respect to overall and severe neurotoxicity. The medications were ranked according to their surface under cumulative ranking curve values. The consistency of direct and indirect evidence was also evaluated. We found that patients with amifostine or vitamin E (VE) treatment exhibited a lower risk of overall neurotoxicity compared to those using the placebo (amifostine: OR = 0.10, 95% CrI: 0.02–0.46; VE: OR = 0.08, 95% CrI: 0.01–0.99). In regard to preventing severe neurotoxicity, glutathione and amifostine treatment appeared to be significantly more effective than the placebo (glutathione: OR = 0.19, 95% CrI: 0.04–0.64; amifostine: OR = 0.12, 95% CrI: 0.02–0.48). In summary, amifostine, VE, and glutathione treatment is considered to be effective in lowering the risk of CICNT. However, further studies which consider safety are required.

Pathophysiology of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy

Chemotherapy-induced neuropathy is a common, dose-dependent adverse effect of several antineoplastics. It can lead to detrimental dose reductions and discontinuation of treatment, and severely affects the quality of life of cancer survivors. Clinically, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy presents as deficits in sensory, motor, and autonomic function which develop in a glove and stocking distribution due to preferential effects on longer axons. The pathophysiological processes are multi-factorial and involve oxidative stress, apoptotic mechanisms, altered calcium homeostasis, axon degeneration and membrane remodeling as well as immune processes and neuroinflammation. This review focusses on the commonly used antineoplastic substances oxaliplatin, cisplatin, vincristine, docetaxel, and paclitaxel which interfere with the cancer cell cycle-leading to cell death and tumor degradation-and cause severe acute and chronic peripheral neuropathies. We discuss drug mechanism of action and pharmacokinetic disposition relevant to the development of peripheral neuropathy, the epidemiology and clinical presentation of chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, emerging insight into genetic susceptibilities as well as current understanding of the pathophysiology and treatment approaches.

Chemotherapy-induced neuropathies-a growing problem for patients and health care providers

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy-induced neuropathies are one of the most common side effects of cancer treatment, surpassing bone marrow suppression and kidney dysfunction. Chemotherapy effects on the nervous system vary between different classes of drugs and depend on specific chemical and physical properties of the drug used. The three most neurotoxic classes of anti-cancer drugs are: platinum-based drugs, taxanes, and thalidomide and its analogs; other, less neurotoxic but also commonly used drugs are: bortezomib, ixabepilone, and vinca alkaloids.

METHODS

Here, in this paper, based on our experience and current knowledge, we provide a short review of the most common, neuropathy-inducing anti-cancer drugs, describe the most prevalent neuropathy symptoms produced by each of them, and outline preventive measures and treatment guidelines for cancer patients suffering from neuropathy and for their health care providers.

RESULTS

Patients should be encouraged to report any signs of neuropathic pain, alteration in sensory perception, tingling, numbness, burning, increased hot/cold sensitivity and motor dysfunctions as early as possible. If known neurotoxic chemotherapeutics are used, a neurological examination with electrophysiological evaluation should be implemented early in the course of treatment so, both patients and physicians would be better prepared to cope with possible neurotoxic effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of neurotoxic chemotherapeutics should be closely monitored and if clinically permitted, that is, if a patient shows signs of cancer regression, drug doses should be reduced or combined with other less neurotoxic anti-cancer medication. If not counteractive, the use of over the counter antineuropathic supplements such as calcium or magnesium might be encouraged. If physically possible, patients should also be encouraged to exercise regularly and avoid factors that might increase nerve damage such as excessive drinking, smoking, or sitting in a cramped position.

Commentary: The Pharmacological Antioxidant Amifostine—Implications of Recent Research for Integrative Cancer Care

Amifostine is a pharmacological antioxidant used as a cytoprotectant in cancer chemotherapy and radiotherapy. It is thought to protect normal tissues relative to tumor tissue against oxidative damage inflicted by cancer therapies by becoming concentrated at higher levels in normal tissues. The degree to which amifostine nevertheless accumulates in tumors and protects them against cancer therapies has been debated. Guidelines have been published that direct its use in chemotherapy and radiation, taking into consideration the concerns of tumor protection. In this article, clinical studies of amifostine appearing since the publication of the most recent set of guidelines are reviewed. Randomized and nonrandomized trials of regimens involving chemo-therapeutic agents (chemotherapy, chemoradiation, conditioning regimens for bone marrow transplant) are discussed. Nineteen studies showed positive effects for amifostine reducing the level of side effects of these regimens, while 9 showed no effect and 1 had a questionable result. Clinically relevant levels of amifostine toxicity were observed in several studies, but subcutaneous administration may reduce such toxicity. Amifostine showed protection against mucositis, esophagitis, neuropathy, and other side effects, although protection against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity was not observed. No evidence of tumor protection was observed. Amifostine may enable populations unable to tolerate conventional cancer therapy to receive treatment of their cancers, even if some degree of tumor protection is eventually discovered. The authors discuss the implications of this research for patient populations seen in integrative cancer care centers and for research on phytochemical antioxidants such as vitamins and carotenoids.

New Insights into Potential Prevention and Management Options for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy

OBJECTIVE

Neurological complications such as chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) and neuropathic pain are frequent side effects of neurotoxic chemotherapy agents. An increasing survival rate and frequent administration of adjuvant chemotherapy treatments involving neurotoxic agents makes it imperative that accurate diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of these neurological complications be implemented.

METHODS

A consideration was undertaken of the current options regarding protective and treatment interventions for patients undergoing chemotherapy with neurotoxic chemotherapy agent or experience with CIPN. Current knowledge on the mechanism of action has also been identified. The following databases PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, CNKI, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant article retrieval.

RESULTS

A range of pharmaceutical, nutraceutical, and herbal medicine treatments were identified that either showed efficacy or had some evidence of efficacy. Duloxetine was the most effective pharmaceutical agent for the treatment of CIPN. Vitamin E demonstrated potential for the prevention of cisplatin-IPN. Intravenous glutathione for oxaliplatin, Vitamin B6 for both oxaliplatin and cisplatin, and omega 3 fatty acids for paclitaxel have shown protection for CIPN. Acetyl-L-carnitine may provide some relief as a treatment option. Acupuncture may be of benefit for some patients and Gosha-jinki-gan may be of benefit for protection from adverse effects of oxaliplatin induced peripheral neuropathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians and researchers acknowledge that there are numerous challenges involved in understanding, preventing, and treating peripheral neuropathy caused by chemotherapeutic agents. New insights into mechanisms of action from chemotherapy agents may facilitate the development of novel preventative and treatment options, thereby enabling medical staff to better support patients by reducing this debilitating side effect.

Taxane induced neuropathy in patients affected by breast cancer: Literature review

Taxane induced neuropathy (TIN) is the most limiting side effect of taxane based chemotherapy, relative to the majority of breast cancer patients undergoing therapy with both docetaxel and paclitaxel. The symptoms begin symmetrically from the toes, because the tips of the longest nerves are affected for first. The patients report sensory symptoms such as paresthesia, dysesthesia, numbness, electric shock-like sensation, motor impairment and neuropathic pain. There is a great inter-individual variability among breast cancer women treated with taxanes, in fact 20-30% of them don't develop neurotoxicity. Actually, there is no standard therapy for TIN, although many medications, antioxidants and natural substances have been tested in vitro and in vivo. We will summarize all most recent literature data on TIN prevention and treatment, in order to reach an improvement in TIN management. Further studies are needed to evaluate new therapies that restore neuronal function and improve life quality of patients.

Platinum-induced neurotoxicity and preventive strategies: past, present, and future

Neurotoxicity is a burdensome side effect of platinum-based chemotherapy that prevents administration of the full efficacious dosage and often leads to treatment withdrawal. Peripheral sensory neurotoxicity varies from paresthesia in fingers to ataxic gait, which might be transient or irreversible. Because the number of patients being treated with these neurotoxic agents is still increasing, the need for understanding the pathogenesis of this dramatic side effect is critical. Platinum derivatives, such as cisplatin and carboplatin, harm mainly peripheral nerves and dorsal root ganglia neurons, possibly because of progressive DNA-adduct accumulation and inhibition of DNA repair pathways (e.g., extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2, c-Jun N-terminal kinase/stress-activated protein kinase, and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinass), which finally mediate apoptosis. Oxaliplatin, with a completely different pharmacokinetic profile, may also alter calcium-sensitive voltage-gated sodium channel kinetics through a calcium ion immobilization by oxalate residue as a calcium chelator and cause acute neurotoxicity. Polymorphisms in several genes, such as voltage-gated sodium channel genes or genes affecting the activity of pivotal metal transporters (e.g., organic cation transporters, organic cation/carnitine transporters, and some metal transporters, such as the copper transporters, and multidrug resistance-associated proteins), can also influence drug neurotoxicity and treatment response. However, most pharmacogenetics studies need to be elucidated by robust evidence. There are supportive reports about the effectiveness of several neuroprotective agents (e.g., vitamin E, glutathione, amifostine, xaliproden, and venlafaxine), but dose adjustment and/or drug withdrawal seem to be the most frequently used methods in the management of platinum-induced peripheral neurotoxicity. To develop alternative options in the treatment of platinum-induced neuropathy, studies on in vitro models and appropriate trials planning should be integrated into the future design of neuroprotective strategies to find the best patient-oriented solution.

Clinical experience with nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel, a novel taxane anticancer agent, and management of adverse events in females with breast cancer

Nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) is currently approved in Japan for treatment of breast cancer. However, apart from phase I clinical trials, data regarding Japanese patients are scant. In the present study, the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel therapy were retrospectively analyzed in 22 patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer who were treated at the National Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer Center between November 2010 and June 2012. The nab-paclitaxel was administered once every three weeks. The median age of the patients was 59 years. The tumors were estrogen-receptor positive and/or progesterone-receptor positive in 63.6% patients. None of the patients had HER2-positive breast cancer. The median number of treatment cycles was six (range, two to 12). Six patients exhibited a partial response; the response rate was 27.3% and the clinical benefit rate was 31.8%. The response rate and clinical benefit rate were higher in patients who received nab-paclitaxel as first- or second-line treatment. The median time to treatment failure was 127 days (range, 27–257). Major adverse events were peripheral neuropathy (59%; Grade 3, 9%), myalgia (59%), rash (45%), and nausea and vomiting (50%). The results suggest that nab-paclitaxel is a well-tolerated and clinically useful anticancer preparation.

Prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy

PURPOSE

The prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) are reviewed.

SUMMARY

A number of agents, including amifostine, glutathione, and vitamin E, were evaluated as prevention strategies for CIPN, with no agent demonstrating efficacy. Calcium and magnesium are effective for the prevention of CIPN; however, concerns regarding reduced chemotherapy efficacy linger. Venlafaxine, a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), was evaluated for the prevention of neuropathy in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trial of patients receiving an oxaliplatin-based regimens every two weeks and demonstrated significantly less acute neurotoxicity compared with the control group. Treatment options for CIPN include reducing the dosage of the chemotherapy, changing the chemotherapy, and treating CIPN with adjunct therapy. Adjunct therapy with topical agents, tricyclic antidepressants, and anticonvulsants, such as pregabalin and gabapentin, have shown limited efficacy. However, a randomized, double-blind, crossover, Phase III trial of duloxetine versus placebo for the treatment of CIPN caused by paclitaxel or oxaliplatin found that patients treated with duloxetine 60 mg daily had a larger average decrease in pain score than those receiving placebo, regardless of the chemotherapy used.

CONCLUSION

Calcium and magnesium infusions and venlafaxine are effective in preventing CIPN but are not routinely used because of concerns related to decreased chemotherapy efficacy. Adjunct treatment options for CIPN include a topical analgesic, a tricyclic antidepressant, an anticonvulsant, or an SNRI. Duloxetine is more effective than placebo in treating oxaliplatin- or paclitaxel-induced CIPN, is well tolerated, and should be considered to be a first-line treatment option for CIPN.

Interventions for preventing neuropathy caused by cisplatin and related compounds

BACKGROUND

Cisplatin and several related antineoplastic drugs used to treat many types of solid tumours are neurotoxic, and most patients completing a full course of cisplatin chemotherapy develop a clinically detectable sensory neuropathy. Effective neuroprotective therapies have been sought.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of purported chemoprotective agents to prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related drugs.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 March 2013, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CINAHL Plus for randomised trials designed to evaluate neuroprotective agents used to prevent or limit neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related drugs among human patients.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs in which the participants received chemotherapy with cisplatin or related compounds, with a potential chemoprotectant (acetylcysteine, amifostine, adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH), BNP7787, calcium and magnesium (Ca/Mg), diethyldithiocarbamate (DDTC), glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, or vitamin E) compared to placebo, no treatment, or other treatments. We considered trials in which participants underwent evaluation zero to six months after completing chemotherapy using quantitative sensory testing (the primary outcome) or other measures including nerve conduction studies or neurological impairment rating using validated scales (secondary outcomes).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed each study, extracted the data and reached consensus, according to standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

As of 2013, the review includes 29 studies describing nine possible chemoprotective agents, as well as description of two published meta-analyses. Among these trials, there were sufficient data in some instances to combine the results from different studies, most often using data from secondary non-quantitative measures. Nine of the studies were newly included at this update. Few of the included studies were at a high risk of bias overall, although often there was too little information to make an assessment. At least two review authors performed a formal review of an additional 44 articles but we did not include them in the final review for a variety of reasons.Of seven eligible amifostine trials (743 participants in total), one used quantitative sensory testing (vibration perception threshold) and demonstrated a favourable outcome in terms of amifostine neuroprotection, but the vibration perception threshold result was based on data from only 14 participants receiving amifostine who completed the post-treatment evaluation and should be regarded with caution. Furthermore the change measured was subclinical. None of the three eligible Ca/Mg trials (or four trials if a single retrospective study was included) described our primary outcome measures. The four Ca/Mg trials included a total of 886 participants. Of the seven eligible glutathione trials (387 participants), one used quantitative sensory testing but reported only qualitative analyses. Four eligible Org 2766 trials (311 participants) employed quantitative sensory testing but reported disparate results; meta-analyses of three of these trials using comparable measures showed no significant vibration perception threshold neuroprotection. The remaining trial reported only descriptive analyses. Similarly, none of the three eligible vitamin E trials (246 participants) reported quantitative sensory testing. The eligible single trials involving acetylcysteine (14 participants), diethyldithiocarbamate (195 participants), oxcarbazepine (32 participants), and retinoic acid (92 participants) did not perform quantitative sensory testing. In all, this review includes data from 2906 participants. However, only seven trials reported data for the primary outcome measure of this review, (quantitative sensory testing) and only nine trials reported our objective secondary measure, nerve conduction test results. Additionally, methodological heterogeneity precluded pooling of the results in most cases. Nonetheless, a larger number of trials reported the results of secondary (non-quantitative and subjective) measures such as the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) for neuropathy (15 trials), and these results we pooled and reported as meta-analysis. Amifostine showed a significantly reduced risk of developing neurotoxicity NCI-CTC (or equivalent) ≥ 2 compared to placebo (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.61). Glutathione was also efficacious with an RR of 0.29 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.85). In three vitamin E studies subjective measures not suitable for combination in meta analysis each favoured vitamin E. For other interventions the qualitative toxicity measures were either negative (N-acetyl cysteine, Ca/Mg, DDTC and retinoic acid) or not evaluated (oxcarbazepine and Org 2766).Adverse events were infrequent or not reported for most interventions. Amifostine was associated with transient hypotension in 8% to 62% of participants, retinoic acid with hypocalcaemia in 11%, and approximately 20% of participantss withdrew from treatment with DDTC because of toxicity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, the data are insufficient to conclude that any of the purported chemoprotective agents (acetylcysteine, amifostine, calcium and magnesium, diethyldithiocarbamate, glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, retinoic acid, or vitamin E) prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platin drugs among human patients, as determined using quantitative, objective measures of neuropathy. Amifostine, calcium and magnesium, glutathione, and vitamin E showed modest but promising (borderline statistically significant) results favouring their ability to reduce the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related chemotherapies, as measured using secondary, non-quantitative and subjective measures such as the NCI-CTC neuropathy grading scale. Among these interventions, the efficacy of only vitamin E was evaluated using quantitative nerve conduction studies; the results were negative and did not support the positive findings based on the qualitative measures. In summary, the present studies are limited by the small number of participants receiving any particular agent, a lack of objective measures of neuropathy, and differing results among similar trials, which make it impossible to conclude that any of the neuroprotective agents tested prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platinum drugs.

Interventions for preventing neuropathy caused by cisplatin and related compounds

BACKGROUND

Cisplatin and several related antineoplastic agents used to treat many types of solid tumors are neurotoxic, and most patients completing a full course of cisplatin chemotherapy develop a clinically detectable sensory neuropathy. Effective neuroprotective therapies have been sought.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy of purported chemoprotective agents to prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related agents.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (25 August 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 3, 2010 in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (January 1966 to August 2010), EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2010), LILACS (January 1982 to August 2010), CINAHL (January 1982 to August 2010) for randomized trials designed to evaluate neuroprotective agents used to prevent or limit neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related agents among human patients.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Quasi-randomized or randomized controlled trials whose participants received cisplatin (or related compounds) chemotherapy with or without a potential chemoprotectant (acetylcysteine, amifostine, ACTH, BNP7787, calcium and magnesium, diethyldithiocarbamate, glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, or vitamin E) and were evaluated zero to six months after completing chemotherapy using quantitative sensory testing (primary) or other measures including nerve conduction studies or neurological impairment rating using validated scales (secondary).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We identified 16 randomized trials involving five possible chemoprotective agents in the initial 2006 review. Each study was reviewed by two authors who extracted the data and reached consensus. The 2010 update identified 11 additional randomized trials consisting of nine possible chemoprotective agents, including three treatments (acetylcysteine, calcium and magnesium, and oxcarbazepine) not among those described in the 2006 review. The included trials in the updated review involved eight unrelated treatments and included many disparate measures of neuropathy, resulting in insufficient data for any one measure to combine the results in most instances.

MAIN RESULTS

One of four eligible amifostine trials (541 total participants in all four trials) used quantitative sensory testing and demonstrated a favorable outcome in terms of amifostine neuroprotection, but the vibration perception threshold result was based on data from only 14 participants receiving amifostine who completed the post-treatment evaluation and should be regarded with caution. Of the six eligible glutathione trials (354 participants), one used quantitative sensory testing but reported only qualitative analyses. Four eligible Org 2766 trials (311 participants) employed quantitative sensory testing reported disparate results; meta-analyses of three trials using comparable measures showed no significant vibration perception threshold neuroprotection. The remaining trial reported only descriptive analyses. The single eligible trials involving acetylcysteine (14 participants), diethyldithiocarbamate (195 participants), calcium and magnesium (33 participants), and oxcarbazepine (32 participants) and the two eligible trials involving vitamin E (57 participants) did not perform quantitative sensory testing. In all, data from 1,537 participants were included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, the data are insufficient to conclude that any of the purported chemoprotective agents (acetylcysteine, amifostine, calcium and magnesium, diethyldithiocarbamate, glutathione, Org 2766, oxycarbazepine, or Vitamin E) prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platin drugs among human patients.

American Society of Clinical Oncology 2008 clinical practice guideline update: use of chemotherapy and radiation therapy protectants

PURPOSE

To update a clinical practice guideline on the use of chemotherapy and radiation therapy protectants for patients with cancer.

METHODS

An update committee reviewed literature published since the last guideline update in 2002.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine reports met the inclusion criteria: palifermin and dexrazoxane, three reports (two studies) each; amifostine, 33 reports (31 studies); and mesna, no published randomized trials identified since 2002.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Dexrazoxane is not recommended for routine use in breast cancer (BC) in adjuvant setting, or metastatic setting with initial doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. Consider use with metastatic BC and other malignancies, for patients who have received more than 300 mg/m(2) doxorubicin who may benefit from continued doxorubicin-containing therapy. Cardiac monitoring should continue in patients receiving doxorubicin. Amifostine may be considered for prevention of cisplatin-associated nephrotoxicity, reduction of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (alternative strategies are reasonable), and to decrease acute and late xerostomia with fractionated radiation therapy alone for head and neck cancer. It is not recommended for protection against thrombocytopenia, prevention of platinum-associated neurotoxicity or ototoxicity or paclitaxel-associated neuropathy, prevention of radiation therapy-associated mucositis in head and neck cancer, or prevention of esophagitis during concurrent chemoradiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer. Palifermin is recommended to decrease severe mucositis in autologous stem-cell transplantation (SCT) for hematologic malignancies with total-body irradiation (TBI) conditioning regimens, and considered for patients undergoing myeloablative allogeneic SCT with TBI-based conditioning regimens. Data are insufficient to recommend use in the non-SCT setting.

Neuroprotection during chemotherapy: a systematic review

The development of neurotoxicity during antineoplastic therapy is one of the most common reasons for termination or modification of cancer treatment. A number of different agents have been proposed to provide neuroprotection without affecting antitumor efficacy. This review provides an evidence-based summary of neuroprotective medicines, an overview of the literature relating to neuroprotection during cancer treatment and a Neurologist perspective risk assessment and management. Through a systematic review the authors identified 49 papers published to date that report human clinical trials involving potential neuroprotectants in adults. Case reports and series completed in a prospective fashion were also included. Sensory neuropathies were the most prevalent subtype in the literature, and most were at least partially reversible with or without neuroprotective treatment. The majority of study medications had minimal side effects, though 2 trials were prematurely terminated because of adverse patient outcomes. No study reported an effect on antitumor efficacy. Because of the variability in study design, cancer type, outcome measures, and clinical confirmation of neuropathy, meta-analysis could not be appropriately performed. We highlight risk factors and discuss neuropathy screening. Descriptive analysis is provided which reveals that many of the agents studied were likely to confer some at least some neuroprotective benefit.

Maximizing the Delivery of Intraperitoneal Therapy While Minimizing Drug Toxicity and Maintaining Quality of Life

This decade has witnessed three large randomized trials (SWOG 8501/GOG 104, GOG 114, and GOG 172) clearly showing the advantages of intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy over systemic/intravenous therapy in treating selected patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. Despite showing an impressive increase in median progression-free survival and median overall survival, complications in IP chemotherapy delivery and drug-related toxicities reported in these studies have hindered widespread acceptance and implementation of first-line IP therapy. Some of these complications and drug-related toxicities are treatment-limiting and need special attention. Success of IP therapy as a first-line choice of treatment is dependent upon ideal patient selection, effective delivery of appropriate doses of chemotherapy agents to the tumor site, and efficient management of complications. With proper orientation and instruction in IP catheter placement and patient management, these obstacles can be overcome, allowing for successful administration of IP therapies. This review article discusses clinical approaches to maximize the delivery of IP therapy while minimizing catheter complications. Mitigating drug toxicities with the use of cytoprotectants such as amifostine and preventing infection with the use of agents, such as amifostine and pegfilgrastim, are discussed in detail.

Peripheral neuropathy induced by microtubule-stabilizing agents

Microtubule-stabilizing agents (MTSAs), including the taxanes and epothilones, are effective chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of many cancers. Neuropathy is a major adverse effect of MTSA-based chemotherapy, with severe peripheral neuropathy (grade 3 or 4) occurring in as many as 30% of patients treated with a MTSA. MTSA-induced neuropathy usually resolves gradually after cessation of the treatment. The most reliable method to accurately assess MTSA-induced neuropathy is by clinical evaluation, although additional techniques are being developed and evaluated. Among MTSA-induced neuropathy, the most extensively studied is that induced by taxanes; such a neuropathy usually presents as sensory neuropathy and is more common with paclitaxel than docetaxel. The incidence of MTSA-induced neuropathy seems to depend on the MTSA dose per treatment cycle, the schedule of treatment, and the duration of the infusion. Although there have been several small clinical trials with neuroprotective agents, early recognition and supportive care are the best approaches for prevention and management of MTSA-induced neuropathy. In the future, research should focus on elucidating the mechanism of MTSA-induced neuropathy, developing reliable in vivo and in vitro preclinical models to study MTSA-induced neuropathy, developing a more reliable grading system for MTSA-induced neuropathy, developing more reliable methods for evaluating MTSA-induced neuropathy, and evaluating the efficacy of potential neuroprotective agents in clinical trials.

Radiation Modifiers: Treatment Overview and Future Investigations

Many radiosensitizers are in current clinical use. In addition, a myriad of potential new targeted therapies, which may also interact with radiation, are in clinical development. The clinical utility of new targeted therapies, in combination with existing radiation sensitizers (chemotherapies) requires further evaluation, as does the understanding of their acute and late radiation effects. Free radical scavengers appear to show promise as radioprotectors, but data for mucoprotection are less convincing.

WITHDRAWN: The safety of synthetic paclitaxel by intralesional delivery with OncoGeltrade mark into skin breast cancer metastases: method and results of a clinical pilot trial

Ahead of Print article withdrawn by publisher