Background

Recently, the application of meditative practices to the treatment of depressive disorders has met with increasing clinical and scientific interest, owing to a lower side-effect burden, potential reduction of polypharmacy, and theoretical considerations that such interventions may target some of the cognitive roots of depression.

Objective

We aimed to determine the state of the evidence supporting this application.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials of techniques meeting the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality definition of meditation, for participants having clinically diagnosed depressive disorders, not currently in remission, were selected. Meditation therapies were separated into praxis (i.e., how they were applied) components, and trial outcomes were reviewed.

Results

18 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified, encompassing 7 distinct techniques and 1173 patients. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy comprised the largest proportion of studies. Studies including patients having acute major depressive episodes (n = 10 studies), and those with residual subacute clinical symptoms despite initial treatment (n = 8), demonstrated moderate to large reductions in depression symptoms within the group, and relative to control groups. There was significant heterogeneity of techniques and trial designs.

Conclusions

A substantial body of evidence indicates that meditation therapies may have salutary effects on patients having clinical depressive disorders during the acute and subacute phases of treatment. Owing to methodologic deficiencies and trial heterogeneity, large-scale, randomized controlled trials with well-described comparator interventions and measures of expectation are needed to clarify the role of meditation in the depression treatment armamentarium.

Background

Despite effective local therapy with surgery and radiotherapy (RT), ~50 % of patients with high-grade soft tissue sarcoma (STS) will relapse and die of disease. Since experimental data suggest a significant synergistic effect when antiangiogenic targeted therapies such as sorafenib are combined with RT, we chose to evaluate preoperative combined modality sorafenib and conformal RT in a phase I/II trial among patients with extremity STS amenable to treatment with curative intent.

Methods

For the phase I trial, eight patients with intermediate- or high-grade STS >5 cm in maximal dimension or low-grade STS >8 cm in maximal dimension received concomitant sorafenib (dose escalation cohort 1:200 twice daily, cohort 2:200/400 daily) and preoperative RT (50 Gy in 25 fractions). Sorafenib was continued during the entire period of RT as tolerated. Surgical resection was completed 4-6 weeks following completion of neoadjuvant sorafenib/RT. Three sorafenib dose levels were planned. Primary endpoints of the phase I trial were maximal tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT).

Results

Eight patients were enrolled in the phase I (five females, median age 44 years, two high-grade pleomorphic, two myxoid/round cell liposarcoma, four other). Median tumor size was 16 cm (range 8-29), and all tumors were located in the lower extremity. Two of five patients treated at dose level 2 developed DLT consisting of grade 3 rash not tolerating drug reintroduction. Other grade 3 side effects included anemia, perirectal abscess, and supraventricular tachycardia. Radiation toxicity (grade 1 or 2 dermatitis; N = 8) and post-surgical complications (three grade 3 wound complications) were comparable to historical controls and other series of preoperative RT monotherapy. Complete pathologic reponse (≥95 % tumor necrosis) was observed in three patients (38 %).

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant sorafenib in combination with RT is tolerable and appears to demonstrate activity in locally advanced extremity STS. Further study to determine efficacy at dose level 1 is warranted. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00805727).

Background

Genetic abnormalities in cell cycle control are common in malignant melanoma. UCN-01 (7-hydroxystaurosporine) is an investigational agent that exhibits antitumor activity by perturbing the cancer cell cycle. A patient with advanced melanoma experienced a partial response in a phase I trial of single agent UCN-01. We sought to determine the activity of UCN-01 against refractory metastatic melanoma in a phase II study. Patients and methods Patients with advanced melanoma received UCN-01 at 90 mg/m(2) over 3 h on cycle 1, reduced to 45 mg/m(2) over 3 h for subsequent cycles, every 21 days. Primary endpoint was tumor response. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A two-stage (17 + 16), single arm phase II design was employed. A true response rate of ≥ 20% (i.e., at least one responder in the first stage, or at least four responders overall) was to be considered promising for further development of UCN-01 in this setting. Results Seventeen patients were accrued in the first stage. One patient was inevaluable for response. Four (24%) patients had stable disease, and 12 (71%) had disease progression. As there were no responders in the first stage, the study was closed to further accrual. Median PFS was 1.3 months (95% CI, 1.2-3.0) while median OS was 7.3 months (95% CI, 3.4-18.4). One-year and two year OS rates were 41% and 12%, respectively. A median of two cycles were delivered (range, 1-18). Grade 3 treatment-related toxicities include hyperglycemia (N = 2), fatigue (N = 1), and diarrhea (N = 1). One patient experienced grade 4 creatinine elevation and grade 4 anemia possibly due to UCN-01. No dose modification was required as these patients had disease progression. Conclusion Although well tolerated, UCN-01 as a single agent did not have sufficient clinical activity to warrant further study in refractory melanoma.

Purpose

Aurora kinases are overexpressed or amplified in numerous malignancies. This study was designed to determine the safety and tolerability of the Aurora A kinase inhibitor alisertib (MLN8237) when combined with weekly irinotecan.

Methods

In this single-center phase 1 study, adult patients with refractory advanced solid tumors received 100 mg/m² irinotecan intravenously on day 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Alisertib at planned escalating dose levels of 20-60 mg was administered orally twice per day on days 1-3 and 8-10. Patients homozygous for UGT1A1*28 were excluded. The primary objective was the safety of alisertib when combined with irinotecan to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary objectives included overall response rate by RECIST and pharmacokinetics in a planned expansion cohort of patients with colorectal cancer treated at the MTD.

Results

A total of 17 patients enrolled at three dose levels. Dose-limiting toxicities included diarrhea, dehydration, and neutropenia. The MTD of alisertib combined with weekly irinotecan was 20 mg twice per day on days 1-3 and 8-10. One fatal cardiac arrest at the highest dose level tested was deemed possibly related to drug treatment. One partial response in 11 efficacy evaluable patients (9%) occurred in a patient with small cell lung cancer. The study was terminated prior to the planned expansion in patients with colorectal cancer.

Conclusion

In contrast to prior results in a pediatric population, adult patients did not tolerate alisertib combined with irinotecan at clinically meaningful doses due to hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicities. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under study number NCT01923337 on Aug 15, 2013.