Kathryn J Ruddy1, Jennifer Le-Rademacher2, Mario E Lacouture3, Mary Wilkinson4, Adedayo A Onitilo5, Amy C Vander Woude6, Maria T Grosse-Perdekamp7, Travis Dockter2, Angelina D Tan2, Andreas Beutler8, Charles L Loprinzi8. 1. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. Electronic address: Ruddy.kathryn@mayo.edu. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 3. Department of Dermatology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave., New York, NY, 10065, USA. 4. Inova Hematology Oncology, 8501 Arlington Blvd., Suite 340, Fairfax, VA, 22031, USA. 5. Marshfield Clinic - Weston Center, 3501 Cranberry Blvd., Weston, WI, 54476, USA. 6. Cancer and Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, 145 Michigan St. NE, #3100, Grand Rapids, MI, 49503, USA. 7. Carle Cancer Center, 509 W. University Ave., Urbana, IL, 61801, USA. 8. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This pilot trial aimed to assess if cooling hands and feet with crushed ice during receipt of paclitaxel helps prevent peripheral neuropathy. METHODS: This prospective, randomized trial compared cryotherapy to standard care in patients initiating paclitaxel weekly x 12. For those on cryotherapy, hands and feet were cooled starting 15 min prior to and ending 15 min after each paclitaxel dose. EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 was completed at baseline, weekly x12, then monthly x6. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for subscale scores, adjusting for baseline, and compared between arms (Wilcoxon rank-sum test). Cross-study comparisons used data from 2 prior similarly-conducted neuropathy trials. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were accrued. Three withdrew and one was ineligible. Of the remaining 42 (21 cryotherapy, 21 control), 39 (19 cryotherapy, 20 control) were analyzable for AUC. Cryotherapy was well tolerated, but the AUC of the CIPN20 sensory scores over 12 weeks of paclitaxel was not found to differ between the study arms (mean difference 3.45, 95% CI -3.13 to 10.02, p = 0.26). However, the control arm of the current trial experienced less neuropathy than did the placebo arms of two previous similar trials. When our cryotherapy arm was compared to the combined control arms from all three trials, the cryotherapy arm had less neuropathy (Wilcoxon Rank-Sum p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: While there was no difference in CIPN20 scores identified between the 2 study arms in the current phase II trial, further investigation is needed given that the control arm experienced less neuropathy than was expected.
PURPOSE: This pilot trial aimed to assess if cooling hands and feet with crushed ice during receipt of paclitaxel helps prevent peripheral neuropathy. METHODS: This prospective, randomized trial compared cryotherapy to standard care in patients initiating paclitaxel weekly x 12. For those on cryotherapy, hands and feet were cooled starting 15 min prior to and ending 15 min after each paclitaxel dose. EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 was completed at baseline, weekly x12, then monthly x6. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for subscale scores, adjusting for baseline, and compared between arms (Wilcoxon rank-sum test). Cross-study comparisons used data from 2 prior similarly-conducted neuropathy trials. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were accrued. Three withdrew and one was ineligible. Of the remaining 42 (21 cryotherapy, 21 control), 39 (19 cryotherapy, 20 control) were analyzable for AUC. Cryotherapy was well tolerated, but the AUC of the CIPN20 sensory scores over 12 weeks of paclitaxel was not found to differ between the study arms (mean difference 3.45, 95% CI -3.13 to 10.02, p = 0.26). However, the control arm of the current trial experienced less neuropathy than did the placebo arms of two previous similar trials. When our cryotherapy arm was compared to the combined control arms from all three trials, the cryotherapy arm had less neuropathy (Wilcoxon Rank-Sum p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: While there was no difference in CIPN20 scores identified between the 2 study arms in the current phase II trial, further investigation is needed given that the control arm experienced less neuropathy than was expected.
Authors: Tessa Cigler; Devora Isseroff; Barbara Fiederlein; Sarah Schneider; Ellen Chuang; Linda Vahdat; Anne Moore Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2015-01-26 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Alexis D Leal; Rui Qin; Pamela J Atherton; Paul Haluska; Robert J Behrens; Charles H Tiber; Patanit Watanaboonyakhet; Matthias Weiss; Paul T Adams; Travis J Dockter; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-03-11 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Dawn L Hershman; Louis H Weimer; Antai Wang; Grace Kranwinkel; Lois Brafman; Deborah Fuentes; Danielle Awad; Katherine D Crew Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Deirdre R Pachman; Travis Dockter; Patricia J Zekan; Briant Fruth; Kathryn J Ruddy; Lauren E Ta; Jacqueline M Lafky; Todor Dentchev; Nguyet Anh Le-Lindqwister; William M Sikov; Nathan Staff; Andreas S Beutler; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-05-27 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Charles L Loprinzi; Brandi N Reeves; Shaker R Dakhil; Jeff A Sloan; Sherry L Wolf; Kelli N Burger; Arif Kamal; Nguyet A Le-Lindqwister; Gamini S Soori; Anthony J Jaslowski; Paul J Novotny; Daniel H Lachance Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-03-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bryan P Schneider; Fei Shen; Guanglong Jiang; Anne O'Neill; Milan Radovich; Lang Li; Laura Gardner; Dongbing Lai; Tatiana Foroud; Joseph A Sparano; George W Sledge; Kathy D Miller Journal: JCO Precis Oncol Date: 2017-08-21
Authors: Alexandre Chan; Amna Elsayed; Ding Quan Ng; Kathryn Ruddy; Charles Loprinzi; Maryam Lustberg Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-10-10 Impact factor: 3.359