| Literature DB >> 28194306 |
Stefan S Schönsteiner1, Heidi Bauder Mißbach2, Axel Benner3, Silja Mack1, Thomas Hamel1, Michael Orth4, Bernhard Landwehrmeyer4, Sigurd D Süßmuth4, Carolin Geitner4, Regine Mayer-Steinacker1, Anneliese Riester1, Andrea Prokein1, Elfriede Erhardt1, Jelena Kunecki1, Anna M Eisenschink1, Rainer Rawer5, Hartmut Döhner1, Elisabeth Kirchner1, Richard F Schlenk1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced polyneuropathy (CIPN) is a common toxicity after chemotherapy, immunomodulatory drugs or proteasome inhibitors, which is difficult to treat and may also have impact on quality of life. The objective of the study was to evaluate whole-body vibration (WBV) on the background of an integrated program (IP) including massage, passive mobilization and physical exercises on CIPN. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In an exploratory phase-2 study patients with CIPN (NCI CTC grade 2/3) were randomized for WBV plus IP (experimental) to IP alone (standard). 15 training sessions within 15 weeks were intended. As primary endpoint we used chair-rising test (CRT) to assess physical fitness and coordination. In addition, locomotor and neurological tests and self-assessment tools were performed.Entities:
Keywords: Chemotherapy associated side effects; Chemotherapy related peripheral neuropathy; Integrated training program; Whole body vibration training
Year: 2017 PMID: 28194306 PMCID: PMC5297221 DOI: 10.1186/s40164-017-0065-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Hematol Oncol ISSN: 2162-3619
Fig. 1CONSORT diagram. This figure shows the clinical course after randomization. N = 66 patients were randomized to the experimental arm and n = 65 patients to the standard arm. N = 44 in the experimental arm and n = 50 in the standard arm reached the follow up period. R randomization, IC informed consent, n number, FU follow up, WBV whole-body vibration therapy
Patient characteristics at baseline according to treatment arm
| Treatment with WBV | Treatment without WBV | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| N = 66 | N = 65 | ||
| Sex, male/female | 29/37 | 34/31 | 0.38 |
| Age, years, median (Range) | 59 (28–70) | 62 (24–71) | 0.10 |
| Diagnosis, no. (%) | 0.85 | ||
| Hematological malignancies | 23 (35) | 21(32) | |
| Multiple myeloma | 8 (12) | 11 (17) | |
| Lymphomas | 10 (15) | 7 (11) | |
| Leukemias | 5 (7.5) | 3 (5) | |
| Solid tumors | 43 (65) | 44 (68) | |
| Colorectal | 13 (20) | 12 (18.5) | |
| Lung | 5 (7.5) | 3 (4.5) | |
| Esophageal/gastric | 2 (3) | 10 (15) | |
| Breast/ovarian | 13 (20) | 12 (18.5) | |
| Other | 7 (10.5) | 4 (6) | |
| Disease state (excl. leukemias) | |||
| Multiple myeloma (Salmon-Durie) | |||
| I | 3 | ||
| II | 4 | 1 | |
| III | 4 | 7 | |
| Lymphoma (Ann-Arbor) | |||
| I | 1 | ||
| II | 1 | ||
| III | 4 | 1 | |
| IV | 4 | 6 | |
| Solid tumors (WHO) | |||
| I | 2 | 4 | |
| II | 8 | 10 | |
| III | 19 | 10 | |
| IV | 14 | 20 | |
| Pretreatment, no. (%) | |||
| Radiotherapy | 28 (42%) | 18 (28%) | 0.10 |
| Chemotherapy | 66 (100%) | 65 (100%) | |
| Combination chemotherapya | 64 (97%) | 63 (97%) | 0.99 |
| Platinum-based | 27 (41%) | 35 (54%) | 0.16 |
| Taxane-based | 22 (33%) | 17 (26%) | 0.45 |
| Vinca alkaloids | 9 (14%) | 8 (12%) | 0.99 |
| Bortezomib | 6 (9%) | 7 (11%) | 0.78 |
| Time since last chemotherapy | |||
| In months, median (range) | 2 (0–98) | 0 (0–51) | 0.07 |
| Time since first chemotherapy | |||
| In months, median (range) | 19 (4–156) | 9 (2–180) | 0.005 |
| Treatment related neuropathy | |||
| NCI-CTC | |||
| Grade II | 28 (42%) | 35 (54%) | 0.22 |
| Grade III | 38 (58%) | 30 (46%) | |
| Active treatment to control pain, No. (%) | 15 (23%) | 21 (32) | 0.24 |
| Chemotherapy during study No. (%) | 25 (38%) | 34 (51%) | 0.12 |
WBV whole-body vibration therapy, WHO World Health Organization, NCI CTC National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria
aSingle agent chemotherapy; experimental arm, n = 2, arsenic trioxide, radioiodine therapy; standard arm, n = 2, cladribine, trastuzumab
Fig. 2Distribution of individual absolute time-differences in seconds between baseline and follow-up needed to complete the CRT according to randomization (black, experimental arm with whole-body vibration therapy; white, standard arm). Arrows indicate patients with normal values for completion of the CRT at follow-up. Patients with no change were marked by a ‘*’ (experimental arm) and ‘#’ (standard arm), respectively. CRT chair-rising test
Fig. 3Distribution of individual absolute differences in degrees Celsius between baseline and completed program of the warm detection threshold (WDT) assessed with quantitative sensory testing according to randomization (black, experimental arm with whole-body vibration therapy; white, standard arm). Patients with no or very little change were marked by a ‘*’ (experimental arm) and ‘#’ (standard arm), respectively. WDT warm detection threshold
Quantitative sensory testing over time
| Total | Treatment with WBV | Treatment without WBV | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C-fibers | ||||
| Warm detection threshold (WDT) | ||||
| Baseline | n = 119 | n = 55 | n = 64 | |
| Test-area °C (range) | 12.3 (1.1 to 18.0) | 12.6 (1.3 to 18.0) | 12.1 (1.1 to 18.0) | 0.49 |
| Reference-area °C (range) | 1.2 (0.5 to 22.8) | 1.2 (0.5 to 22.8) | 1.2 (0.5 to 17.6) | 0.45 |
| After 15 Interventions | n = 87 | n = 40 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area °C (range) | 10.4 (1.3 to 18.0) | 9.5 (1.3 to 18.0) | 11.0 (2.7 to 18.0) | 0.09 |
| Reference-area °C (range) | 1.3 (0.5 to 15.8) | 1.3 (0.5 to 8.8) | 1.3 (0.5 to 15.8) | 0.72 |
| Difference | n = 87 | n = 40 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area Δ °C (range) | −0.7 (−13.1 to 16.9) | −1.1 (−13.1 to 6.2) | −0.1 (−10.0 to 16.9) | 0.03 |
| Reference-area Δ °C (range) | 0.0 (−22.2 to 2.2) | 0.0 (−22.2 to 2.2) | 0.0 (−16.5 to 2.0) | 0.35 |
| Heat pain threshold (HPT) | ||||
| Baseline | n = 129 | n = 55 | n = 64 | |
| Test-area °C (range) | 48.6 (34.9 to 50.0) | 48.7 (34.9 to 50.0) | 48.3 (39.2 to 50.0) | 0.39 |
| Reference-area °C (range) | 44.7 (33.8 to 50.0) | 44.7 (33.9 to 49.5) | 44.7 (33.8 to 50.0) | 0.36 |
| After 15 Interventions | n = 87 | n = 40 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area °C (range) | 48.5 (37.4 to 50.0) | 48.1 (37.4 to 50.0) | 48.7 (39.9 to 50.0) | 0.47 |
| Reference-area °C (range) | 44.9 (33.8 to 50.0) | 44.8 (33.9 to 50.0) | 45.2 (33.8 to 50.0) | 0.48 |
| Difference | n = 85 | n = 38 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area Δ °C (range) | 0.0 (−7.2 to 8.94) | −0.04 (−3.93 to 3.57) | 0.0 (−3.34 to 3.60) | 0.54 |
| Reference-area Δ °C (range) | 0.0 (−4.4 to 0.6) | 0.0 (−0.12 to 4.23) | 0.0 (−0.51 to 2.12) | 0.92 |
| Aδ-fibers | ||||
| Cold detection threshold (CDT) | ||||
| Baseline | n = 110 | n = 56 | n = 64 | |
| Test-area °C (range) | −7.8 (−32.0 to 1.7) | −7.6 (−32.0 to −1.7) | −8.4 (−32.0 to −1.9) | 0.35 |
| Reference-area °C (range) | −1.2 (−21.9 to 0.5) | −1.1 (−9.7 to −0.5) | −1.4 (-21.9 to −0.5) | 0.08 |
| After 15 Interventions | n = 88 | n = 41 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area °C (range) | −6.8 (−32.0 to −1.3) | −6.6 (−32.0 to −1.3) | −6.9 (−32.0 to −1.6) | 0.36 |
| Reference-area °C (range) | −1.3 (−21.9 to 0.5) | −1.1 (−6.8 to −0.47) | −1.4 (−21.9 to −0.5) | 0.12 |
| Difference | n = 85 | n = 38 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area Δ °C (range) | 0.7 (−11.1 to 26.9) | 1.1 (−10.1 to 24.9) | 0.7 (−11.1 to 26.9) | 0.46 |
| Reference-area Δ °C (range) | 0.0 (−4.0 to 6.7) | 0.0 −0.3 to 6.7) | 0.0 (4.0 to 3.9) | 0.23 |
| Aβ-fibers | ||||
| Mechanical detection threshold (MDT) | ||||
| Baseline | n = 110 | n = 56 | n = 64 | |
| Test-area mN (range) | 13.9 (0.2 to 724) | 12.6 (0.9 to 724) | 16.6 (0.2 to 223) | 0.44 |
| Reference-area mN (range) | 0.2 (0.2 to 6.1) | 0.2 (0.2 to 6.1) | 0.2 (0.2 to 4.6) | 0.20 |
| After 15 Interventions | n = 88 | n = 41 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area mN (range) | 17.8 (0.3 to 724) | 19.7 (0.3 to 724) | 17.2 (1.3 to 724) | 0.73 |
| Reference-area mN (range) | 0.2 (0.2 to 11.3) | 0.2 (0.2 to 11.3) | 0.2 (0.2 to 4.6) | 0.26 |
| Difference | n = 85 | n = 38 | n = 47 | |
| Test-area mN (range) | 0.0 (−174 to 501) | 0.8 (−174 to 207) | −3.4 (−105 to 501) | 0.35 |
| Reference-area mN (range) | 0.0 (−0.5 to 4.8) | 0.0 (−0.02 to 4.8) | 0.0 (−0.5 to 0.2) | 0.94 |
WBV whole-body vibration therapy, °c degree Celsius, mN Millinewton, WDT warm detection threshold, CDT cold detection threshold, HPT heat pain threshold, MDT mechanical detection threshold
Fig. 4Predicted times and their 95% confidence intervals for completion of the CRT according to a GEE model including assessment time points (baseline, 8th session, 15th session, follow-up), treatment arm (open circle, dashed line, without WBV; filled circle, solid line, with WBV) and initial warm detection threshold (WDT). Predictions are shown given the overall mean WDT level of 11.66. CRT chair-rising test, GEE generalized estimated equation, WBV whole-body vibration therapy, WDT warm detection threshold