Development of the measure of ovarian symptoms and treatment concerns: aiming for optimal measurement of patient-reported symptom benefit with chemotherapy for symptomatic ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the optimal patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for assessing symptom benefit in trials of palliative chemotherapy for women with symptomatic ovarian cancer. METHODS: Candidate PROMs were EORTC QLQ-C30 plus ovarian-specific QLQ-OV28, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian (FACT-O), FACT Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), and gynecologic cancer-specific Symptom Representation Questionnaire. Predefined optimality criteria were inclusion of all symptoms necessary for the specified purpose, recall period covering typical length of palliative chemotherapy, numerical item rating scales, and all necessary symptoms included in a single symptom index. Qualitative and quantitative methods were applied to data from stage 1 of the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup Symptom Benefit Study to determine the set of necessary symptoms and to objectively assess candidate PROMs against the optimality criteria. RESULTS: Ten necessary symptoms were identified: pain, fatigue, abdominal bloating/discomfort, sleep disturbance, bowel disturbance, nausea and vomiting, shortness of breath, poor appetite, urinary symptoms, and weight changes. Although QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 together cover all these symptoms, they split them into numerous scales, dissipating potential symptom-benefit signal. Conversely, FACT-O does not cover all necessary symptoms and contains many other HRQoL-related items and treatment side effects, diluting potential symptom-benefit signal when summed into scales. Item response scales and composite scoring of all candidate PROMs were suboptimal to our specific purpose. We therefore developed a new PROM, the Measure of Ovarian Symptoms and Treatment (MOST) concerns, to provide optimal measurement for the specified purpose. CONCLUSIONS: This article documents the development of the MOST, a new PROM designed to assess patient-reported benefits and burden as end points in clinical trials of palliative chemotherapy for women with symptomatic ovarian cancer. The validity, reliability, and statistical efficiency of the MOST, relative to the best candidate scales of existing PROMs, will be assessed in the stage 2 of Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup Symptom Benefit Study

Ultrasound screening for asymptomatic carotid stenosis in subjects with calcifications in the area of the carotid arteries on panoramic radiographs: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Directed ultrasonic screening for carotid stenosis is cost-effective in populations with > 5% prevalence of the diagnosis. Occasionally, calcifications in the area of the carotid arteries are incidentally detected on odontological panoramic radiographs. We aimed to determine if directed screening for carotid stenosis with ultrasound is indicated in individuals with such calcifications.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was a cross-sectional study. Carotid ultrasound examinations were performed on consecutive persons, with findings of calcifications in the area of the carotid arteries on panoramic radiography that were otherwise eligible for asymptomatic carotid endarterectomy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Calcification in the area of the carotid arteries was seen in 176 of 1182 persons undergoing panoramic radiography. Of these, 117 fulfilled the inclusion criterion and were examined with carotid ultrasound. Eight persons (6.8%; 95% CI 2.2-11.5%) had a carotid stenosis - not significant over the 5% pre-specified threshold (p = 0.232, Binomial test). However, there was a significant sex difference (p = 0.008), as all stenoses were found in men. Among men, 12.5% (95%CI 4.2-20.8%) had carotid stenosis - significantly over the 5% pre-specified threshold (p = 0.014, Binomial test).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The incidental finding of calcification in the area of the carotid arteries on panoramic radiographs should be followed up with carotid screening in men that are otherwise eligible for asymptomatic carotid endarterectomy.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>The study was registered at <url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov</url>; <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00514644">NCT00514644</a></p

Efficacy and tolerability of veliparib (V; ABT-888) in combination with carboplatin (C) and paclitaxel (P) vs placebo (Plc)+C/P in patients (pts) with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and metastatic breast cancer: A randomized, phase 2 study

Background: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors block DNA damage repair and may thereby enhance the clinical activity of DNA-damaging chemotherapy. Homologous recombination is defective in BRCA1/2-mutated tumors, leading to more error-prone mechanisms of DNA repair and increased sensitivity to PARP inhibition. V is a potent PARP inhibitor that enhances the antitumor activity of platinum agents in preclinical models. This phase 2 trial (NCT01506609) investigated the safety and efficacy of V+C/P or V+ temozolomide (TMZ) vs Plc+C/P in pts with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer harboring a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Results of the V+C/P and Plc+C/P arms are presented; V+TMZ results will be presented separately. Methods: Pts ≥18 years with histologically confirmed locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer were randomized 1:1:1 to: 1) V 40 mg BID D1–7+TMZ, 28-D cycle; 2) V 120 mg BID D1–7+C AUC 6, D3 and P 175 mg/m2, D3, 21-D cycle; or 3) Plc BID D1–7+C/P. Key eligibility criteria included deleterious BRCA1/2 mutation, ≤2 prior chemotherapies for metastatic disease, no prior platinum agent, and no CNS metastases. Randomization was stratified by hormone receptor status..

Evaluation of veliparib (V) and temozolomide (TMZ) in a phase 2 randomized study of the efficacy and tolerability of V+TMZ or carboplatin (C) and paclitaxel (P) vs placebo (Plc)+C/P in patients (pts) with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and metastatic breast cancer

DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS16-P4-22-02 Published February 201

Role of Surface Area, Primary Particle Size, and Crystal Phase on Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticle Dispersion Properties

Characterizing nanoparticle dispersions and understanding the effect of parameters that alter dispersion properties are important for both environmental applications and toxicity investigations. The role of particle surface area, primary particle size, and crystal phase on TiO2 nanoparticle dispersion properties is reported. Hydrodynamic size, zeta potential, and isoelectric point (IEP) of ten laboratory synthesized TiO2 samples, and one commercial Degussa TiO2 sample (P25) dispersed in different solutions were characterized. Solution ionic strength and pH affect titania dispersion properties. The effect of monovalent (NaCl) and divalent (MgCl2) inert electrolytes on dispersion properties was quantified through their contribution to ionic strength. Increasing titania particle surface area resulted in a decrease in solution pH. At fixed pH, increasing the particle surface area enhanced the collision frequency between particles and led to a higher degree of agglomeration. In addition to the synthesis method, TiO2 isoelectric point was found to be dependent on particle size. As anatase TiO2 primary particle size increased from 6 nm to 104 nm, its IEP decreased from 6.0 to 3.8 that also results in changes in dispersion zeta potential and hydrodynamic size. In contrast to particle size, TiO2 nanoparticle IEP was found to be insensitive to particle crystal structure

A randomized multi-center phase II trial of the angiogenesis inhibitor Cilengitide (EMD 121974) and gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND: Anti-angiogenic treatment is believed to have at least cystostatic effects in highly vascularized tumours like pancreatic cancer. In this study, the treatment effects of the angiogenesis inhibitor Cilengitide and gemcitabine were compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: A multi-national, open-label, controlled, randomized, parallel-group, phase II pilot study was conducted in 20 centers in 7 countries. Cilengitide was administered at 600 mg/m(2 )twice weekly for 4 weeks per cycle and gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m(2 )for 3 weeks followed by a week of rest per cycle. The planned treatment period was 6 four-week cycles. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, quality of life (QoL), effects on biological markers of disease (CA 19.9) and angiogenesis (vascular endothelial growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor), and safety. An ancillary study investigated the pharmacokinetics of both drugs in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were randomized. The median overall survival was 6.7 months for Cilengitide and gemcitabine and 7.7 months for gemcitabine alone. The median PFS times were 3.6 months and 3.8 months, respectively. The overall response rates were 17% and 14%, and the tumor growth control rates were 54% and 56%, respectively. Changes in the levels of CA 19.9 went in line with the clinical course of the disease, but no apparent relationships were seen with the biological markers of angiogenesis. QoL and safety evaluations were comparable between treatment groups. Pharmacokinetic studies showed no influence of gemcitabine on the pharmacokinetic parameters of Cilengitide and vice versa. CONCLUSION: There were no clinically important differences observed regarding efficacy, safety and QoL between the groups. The observations lay in the range of other clinical studies in this setting. The combination regimen was well tolerated with no adverse effects on the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of either agent