Introduction

Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability and remains under-treated in nearly half of patients with cancer. The opioid crisis has highlighted an urgent public health need for effective nonpharmacological pain management. Electroacupuncture (EA) and Battlefield Acupuncture (BFA) represent nonpharmacological modalities used in clinical practice to manage pain; however, their effectiveness has not been rigorously evaluated in oncology settings.

Methods

We describe the design of a 3-arm, parallel, single-center, multisite randomized controlled trial that investigates EA and BFA versus usual-care wait-list control (WLC) for chronic musculoskeletal pain among 360 patients with diverse cancer types across various stages. The primary aim is to compare effects of EA and BFA versus WLC on pain, physical function, and co-morbid symptoms. The secondary aim is to examine the interaction between patient outcome expectancy and acupuncture modality (EA vs BFA) on pain reduction. The tertiary aim is to evaluate the association between genetic polymorphisms and responses to acupuncture. Patients will be randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to EA:BFA:WLC. Acupuncture groups will receive weekly treatments over 10 weeks. WLC will receive usual care over the same evaluation period as the acupuncture groups. The primary endpoint will be the change in average pain intensity score from baseline to week 12. We will collect validated patient-reported outcomes and blood/saliva samples at multiple timepoints over 24 weeks.

Discussion

Our findings will advance nonpharmacological pain management in oncology and inform personalized treatment approaches that integrate individuals' expectations and genetic biomarkers to deliver "precision" acupuncture to cancer patients with chronic pain.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02979574.

Background

The outcomes of patients with surgery- and radiation-refractory meningiomas treated with medical therapies are poorly defined. Published reports are limited by small patient numbers, selection bias, inclusion of mixed histologic grades and stages of illness, and World Health Organization (WHO) criteria changes. This analysis seeks to define outcome benchmarks for future clinical trial design.

Methods

A PubMed literature search was performed for all English language publications on medical therapy for meningioma. Reports were tabulated and analyzed for number of patients, histologic grade, prior therapy, overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and radiographic response.

Results

Forty-seven publications were identified and divided by histology and prior therapies, including only those that treated patients who were surgery and radiation refractory for further analysis. This included a variety of agents (hydroxyurea, temozolomide, irinotecan, interferon-α, mifepristone, octreotide analogues, megestrol acetate, bevacizumab, imatinib, erlotinib, and gefitinib) from retrospective, pilot, and phase II studies, exploratory arms of other studies, and a single phase III study. The only outcome extractable from all studies was the PFS 6-month rate, and a weighted average was calculated separately for WHO grade I meningioma and combined WHO grade II/III meningioma. For WHO I meningioma, the weighted average PFS-6 was 29% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3%-37.7%). For WHO II/III meningioma, the weighted average PFS-6 was 26% (95% CI: 19.3%-32.7%).

Conclusions

This comprehensive review confirms the poor outcomes of medical therapy for surgery- and radiation-refractory meningioma. We recommend the above PFS-6 benchmarks for future trial design.

Introduction

Pain, comorbid fatigue and sleep disturbances are common and distressing symptoms for patients with advanced cancer, negatively impacting their quality of life. Clinical guidelines recommend non-pharmacological interventions, including acupuncture and massage, for pain management in adult patients with cancer in adjunct to conventional care. However, high-quality evidence about the comparative effectiveness and long-term durability of these therapies for symptom management is limited.

Methods and analysis

We describe the design of a two-arm, parallel group, multicentre randomised controlled trial that investigates the use of acupuncture versus massage for musculoskeletal pain among 300 patients with diverse types of advanced cancer. The primary aim is to evaluate the long-term effectiveness (26 weeks from randomisation) of acupuncture vs massage for pain (primary outcome) and comorbid symptoms (fatigue, sleep disturbance and quality of life). The secondary aim is to identify patient-level demographic characteristics (eg, sex, race, age), clinical factors (eg, insomnia, pain severity) and psychological attributes that are associated with a greater reduction in pain for either acupuncture or massage. Patients will receive weekly acupuncture or massage treatments for 10 weeks, followed by monthly booster sessions up to 26 weeks. The primary endpoint will be the change in worst pain intensity score from baseline to 26 weeks. We will collect validated patient-reported outcomes at multiple time points over 26 weeks.

Ethics and dissemination

The Institutional Review Board at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York approved this protocol. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and conference presentations. Our findings will help patients and healthcare providers make informed decisions about incorporating non-pharmacological treatments to manage pain for patients with advanced cancer.

Trial registration number

NCT04095234.

Purpose

To establish the maximum tolerated dose of a 3-fraction hypofractionated stereotactic reirradiation schedule when delivered with concomitant bevacizumab to treat recurrent high-grade gliomas.

Methods and materials

Patients with recurrent high-grade glioma with Karnofsky performance status ≥60, history of standard fractionated initial radiation, tumor volume at recurrence ≤40 cm³, and absence of brainstem or corpus callosum involvement were eligible. A standard 3+3 phase 1 dose escalation trial design was utilized, with dose-limiting toxicities defined as any grade 3 to 5 toxicities possibly, probably, or definitely related to radiation. Bevacizumab was given at a dose of 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Hypofractionated stereotactic reirradiation was initiated after 2 bevacizumab doses, delivered in 3 fractions every other day, starting at 9 Gy per fraction.

Results

A total of 3 patients were enrolled at the 9 Gy × 3 dose level cohort, 5 in the 10 Gy × 3 cohort, and 7 in the 11 Gy × 3 cohort. One dose-limiting toxicity of grade 3 fatigue and cognitive deterioration possibly related to hypofractionated stereotactic reirradiation was observed in the 11 Gy × 3 cohort, and this dose was declared the maximum tolerated dose in combination with bevacizumab. Although no symptomatic radionecrosis was observed, substantial treatment-related effects and necrosis were observed in resected specimens. The intent-to-treat median overall survival was 13 months.

Conclusions

Reirradiation using a 3-fraction schedule with bevacizumab support is feasible and reasonably well tolerated. Dose-escalation was possible up to 11 Gy × 3, which achieves a near doubling in the delivered biological equivalent dose to normal brain, in comparison with our previous 6 Gy × 5 schedule. Promising overall survival warrants further investigation.

There are no validated biomarkers that can aid clinicians in selecting who would best benefit from anticytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 monotherapy versus combination checkpoint blockade in patients with advanced melanoma who have progressive disease after programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade. We conducted a randomized multicenter phase II trial in patients with advanced melanoma. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 1 mg/kg of nivolumab plus 3 mg/kg of ipilimumab or 3 mg/kg of ipilimumab every 3 weeks for up to four doses. Patients were stratified by histological subtype and prior response to PD-1 therapy. The primary clinical objective was overall response rate by week 18. Translational biomarker analyses were conducted in patients with blood and tissue samples. Objective responses were seen in 5 of 9 patients in the ipilimumab arm and 2 of 10 patients in the ipilimumab+nivolumab arm; disease control rates (DCRs) (66.7% vs 60.0%) and rates of grade 3-4 adverse events (56% vs 50%) were comparable between arms. In a pooled analysis, patients with clinical benefit (CB), defined as Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors response or progression-free for 6 months, showed increased circulating CD4+ T cells with higher polyfunctionality and interferon gamma production following treatment. Tumor profiling revealed enrichment of NRAS mutations and activation of transcriptional programs associated with innate and adaptive immunity in patients with CB. In patients with advanced melanoma that previously progressed on PD-1 blockade, objective responses were seen in both arms, with comparable DCRs. Findings from biomarker analyses provided hypothesis-generating signals for validation in future studies of larger patient cohorts. NCT02731729.