INTRODUCTION:Sulindac represents a promising candidate agent for lung cancer chemoprevention, but clinical trial data have not been previously reported. We conducted a randomized, phase II chemoprevention trial involving current or former cigarette smokers (≥30 pack-years) utilizing the multi-center, inter-disciplinary infrastructure of the Cancer Prevention Network (CPN). METHODS: At least 1 bronchial dysplastic lesion identified by fluorescence bronchoscopy was required for randomization. Intervention assignments were sulindac 150mg bid or an identical placebo bid for 6 months. Trial endpoints included changes in histologic grade of dysplasia (per-participant as primary endpoint and per lesion as secondary endpoint), number of dysplastic lesions (per-participant), and Ki67 labeling index. RESULTS: Slower than anticipated recruitment led to trial closure after randomizing participants (n=31 and n=30 in the sulindac and placebo arms, respectively). Pre- and post-intervention fluorescence bronchoscopy data were available for 53/61 (87%) randomized, eligible participants. The median (range) of dysplastic lesions at baseline was 2 (1-12) in the sulindac arm and 2 (1-7) in the placebo arm. Change in dysplasia was categorized as regression:stable:progression for 15:3:8 (58%:12%:31%) subjects in the sulindac arm and 15:2:10 (56%:7%:37%) subjects in the placebo arm; these distributions were not statistically different (p=0.85). Median Ki67 expression (% cells stained positive) was significantly reduced in both the placebo (30 versus 5; p=0.0005) and sulindac (30 versus 10; p=0.0003) arms, but the difference between arms was not statistically significant (p=0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this multi-center, phase II squamous cell lung cancer chemoprevention trial do not demonstrate sufficient benefits from sulindac 150mg bid for 6 months to warrant additional phase III testing. Investigation of pathway-focused agents is necessary for lung cancer chemoprevention.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION:Sulindac represents a promising candidate agent for lung cancer chemoprevention, but clinical trial data have not been previously reported. We conducted a randomized, phase II chemoprevention trial involving current or former cigarette smokers (≥30 pack-years) utilizing the multi-center, inter-disciplinary infrastructure of the Cancer Prevention Network (CPN). METHODS: At least 1 bronchial dysplastic lesion identified by fluorescence bronchoscopy was required for randomization. Intervention assignments were sulindac 150mg bid or an identical placebo bid for 6 months. Trial endpoints included changes in histologic grade of dysplasia (per-participant as primary endpoint and per lesion as secondary endpoint), number of dysplastic lesions (per-participant), and Ki67 labeling index. RESULTS: Slower than anticipated recruitment led to trial closure after randomizing participants (n=31 and n=30 in the sulindac and placebo arms, respectively). Pre- and post-intervention fluorescence bronchoscopy data were available for 53/61 (87%) randomized, eligible participants. The median (range) of dysplastic lesions at baseline was 2 (1-12) in the sulindac arm and 2 (1-7) in the placebo arm. Change in dysplasia was categorized as regression:stable:progression for 15:3:8 (58%:12%:31%) subjects in the sulindac arm and 15:2:10 (56%:7%:37%) subjects in the placebo arm; these distributions were not statistically different (p=0.85). Median Ki67 expression (% cells stained positive) was significantly reduced in both the placebo (30 versus 5; p=0.0005) and sulindac (30 versus 10; p=0.0003) arms, but the difference between arms was not statistically significant (p=0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this multi-center, phase II squamous cell lung cancer chemoprevention trial do not demonstrate sufficient benefits from sulindac 150mg bid for 6 months to warrant additional phase III testing. Investigation of pathway-focused agents is necessary for lung cancer chemoprevention.
Authors: Jenny T Mao; Michael C Fishbein; Bradley Adams; Michael D Roth; Lee Goodglick; Longsheng Hong; Marie Burdick; E Robert M Strieter; Carmack Holmes; Donald P Tashkin; Steven M Dubinett Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-01-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: S Lam; T Kennedy; M Unger; Y E Miller; D Gelmont; V Rusch; B Gipe; D Howard; J C LeRiche; A Coldman; A F Gazdar Journal: Chest Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Nancy R Cook; I-Min Lee; J Michael Gaziano; David Gordon; Paul M Ridker; JoAnn E Manson; Charles H Hennekens; Julie E Buring Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-07-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jenny T Mao; Xiaoyan Cui; Karen Reckamp; Ming Liu; Kostyantyn Krysan; Harnisha Dalwadi; Sherven Sharma; Saswati Hazra; Robert Strieter; Brian Gardner; Steven M Dubinett Journal: Clin Lung Cancer Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: K Häussinger; H Becker; F Stanzel; A Kreuzer; B Schmidt; J Strausz; S Cavaliere; F Herth; M Kohlhäufl; K-M Müller; R-M Huber; U Pichlmeier; Ch T Bolliger Journal: Thorax Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Silvio De Flora; Alberto Izzotti; Francesco D'Agostini; Carlo Bennicelli; Ming You; Ronald A Lubet; Roumen M Balansky Journal: Exp Lung Res Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: R Peto; R Gray; R Collins; K Wheatley; C Hennekens; K Jamrozik; C Warlow; B Hafner; E Thompson; S Norton Journal: Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) Date: 1988-01-30