Prevention Of Hand-foot Syndrome Research Articles

A Randomized Single-Blinded Phase II Trial Comparing Efficacy and Quality of Life of Topical Aloe Vera Gel Plus Urea Cream Versus Urea Cream Alone for Prevention of Hand Foot Syndrome in Cancer Patients Receiving Capecitabine.

Capecitabine has been widely prescribed to treat various cancers. The hand foot syndrome (HFS) is the most troublesome adverse effect. Urea cream has been pre-emptively co-prescribed, even though its efficacy is doubtful. Aloe vera gel with urea cream might potentiate each other. This trial was intended to prove the efficacy of this combination. The investigators conducted a randomized single-blinded phase II study. The participants were randomized 1:1 to receive the combination of aloe vera gel and 10% urea cream (n = 30), the experimental A+U arm and 10% urea cream alone (n = 31), the U arm. The sample size was calculated to have 90% power to show the significant 20% reduction in the incidence of HFS grade 2-3 of the combination therapy with alpha level = 0.05. Both the CTCAE criteria version 5 and the dermatology life quality index (DLQI) were assessed to determine the severity of HFS and quality of life, respectively. Most of the participants had rectal cancer (A+U: 43.3%; U: 41.9%). In the A+U group, 86.7% had grade 0-1 HFS and 13.3% had grade 2-3 HFS. In the U group, 64.5% had grade 0-1 HFS and 35.5% had grade 2-3 HFS (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.045). Grade 2-3 HFS was significantly lower in the combination group. Combination of aloe vera gel and 10% urea cream ameliorated the severity of HFS in participants taking capecitabine; however, no significant difference in DLQI between the groups was demonstrated.

Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of topical diclofenac in prevention of hand-foot syndrome in patients receiving capecitabine.

12005 Background: Capecitabine induced HFS is associated with deterioration of quality of life of patients and dose of capecitabine is often reduced to manage this adverse event. Celecoxib is the only effective intervention in preventing HFS; however, its widespread use is limited due to its own safety concerns. We conducted this study to assess the efficacy of topical diclofenac in preventing capecitabine induced HFS. Methods: Patients with breast and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, planned for capecitabine (monotherapy or combination) treatment were randomized in 1:1 to receive topical diclofenac or placebo gel for 4 cycles or until development of HFS, whichever was earlier. Stratified (male or female; capecitabine monotherapy or combination therapy) permuted variable size block randomization was done using a computer-generated random numbers sequence. Primary objective was to compare the incidence of grade 2 or higher HFS in diclofenac and placebo arms. Secondary objectives were incidence of any grade HFS, capecitabine dose changes due to HFS and self-reported adherence with application. Results: A total of 263 patients were randomized to apply topical diclofenac gel (n=130) or placebo (n=133). Baseline characteristics were similar in both the arms (Table). The incidence of grade 2 or higher HFS was 3.8% (95% CI, 1.6%-8.9%) in the diclofenac arm compared with 15.0% (95% CI, 9.9%-22.2%) in the placebo arm (P=0.003). Any grade HFS was significantly lower in the study arm compared with the placebo arm (6.1% vs 18.1%; P=0.003). A lower incidence of HFS was observed in the diclofenac arm across the subgroups (breast and GI cancers; males and females). Capecitabine dose reductions were less frequent in the diclofenac arm (3.8%) compared with the placebo arm (15%) (P=0.002). Adherence to topical treatment was similar in the diclofenac arm (96.7 +/- 19.1%) compared with the placebo arm (94.0 +/- 28.3%) (P=0.36). Other capecitabine associated adverse events, including diarrhea, mucositis, and myelosuppression were not significantly different in both the arms. Conclusions: Topical diclofenac is effective in preventing all grades of HFS in patients receiving capecitabine. Diclofenac application was also associated with lesser dose reductions of capecitabine. This trial establishes topical diclofenac as the new standard of care to prevent capecitabine associated HFS. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2021/01/030592 . [Table: see text]

Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of topical diclofenac in the prevention of hand-foot syndrome in patients receiving capecitabine (the D-TORCH study)

IntroductionHand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a common cutaneous side effect of capecitabine therapy. Apart from oral cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor (celecoxib), there are no proven strategies for the prevention of HFS. However, celecoxib is associated with significant cardiotoxicity. To date, no study has evaluated the role of topical COX inhibitor, diclofenac. In this study, we aim to compare topical 1% diclofenac gel with placebo in the prevention of capecitabine-induced HFS.MethodsThis is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group superiority trial: the Diclofenac Topical in Reducing Capecitabine induced HFS (D-TORCH) study. A total of 264 patients with breast and gastrointestinal malignancies will be randomly allocated (stratified by sex and type of therapy [monotherapy or combination regimen with capecitabine]) to receive either 1% topical diclofenac or placebo that will be applied over the palmar and dorsal surface of the hands twice daily whilst taking capecitabine for 12 weeks. The patients will be followed up until the end of four cycles. The primary objective of this study is to compare the effect of topical diclofenac with placebo in preventing HFS (incidence of NCI CTCAEv5.0 grade 2 or higher HFS). The secondary objective is to compare the effect of topical diclofenac with placebo on preventing all grades of HFS (incidence of NCI CTCv5.0 all grade HFS), time to develop HFS (from the start of capecitabine), patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (HF-HRQoL questionnaire), adherence with the application (self-reported), capecitabine dose changes (number of patients with dose modifications due to HFS) and safety profile (NCICTCv5.0 all grade HFS)DiscussionThe D-TORCH study aims to determine if 1% topical diclofenac reduces the incidence of grade 2 or higher HFS in patients receiving capecitabine. To date, there have been a lot of trials for hand-foot syndrome prevention using agents like pyridoxine, vitamin E, carvedilol, and various polyherbal formulations, but none has been found successful. If the trial meets the primary end point, 1% topical diclofenac will be the new standard of care for HFS prevention.Trial registrationClinical Trials Registry of India CTRI/2021/01/030592. Prospectively registered on January 19, 2021

Creme de dexpantenol à base de lanolina, hidrocortisona tópica ou observação na prevenção da síndrome mão-pé induzida por capecitabina: um estudo de fase III

INTRODUCTION: The use of capecitabine is associated with hand-foot syndrome (HFS). Since there is anecdotal evidence that lanolin-based creams and topical steroids are useful for the treatment of HFS, we conducted a three- arm phase III trial to compare observation, lanolin-based cream with dexpanthenol (L-D), and topical hydrocortisone in the prevention of HFS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with breast or colorectal cancer with indication to use capecitabine as a single agent or in combination were randomized in an open-label fashion to one of the three arms. The initial capecitabine dose was 1,000 or 1,250mg/m2, according to the physicians discretion and clinical practice, and dose adjustments followed the local label. The primary endpoint was the frequency of HFS of any grade in the intent-to-treat population, whereas quality of life (QoL), change from baseline in performance status and adverse events were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Mean age among the 595 patients randomized was 58 years, and 69% were women. 37% of patients had advanced breast cancer and 63% of patients had colorectal cancer. Capecitabine was used as a single agent in 67% of patients; among the remaining 33% of patients, 82% were treated with oxaliplatin-based combinations. HFS of any grade was seen in 35.6% of patients in the observation group, 24.9% with L-D, and 34.3% with hydrocortisone (p=0.039). The unadjusted odds ratio for the frequency of HFS in the arm treated with L-D was 0.60 (95%CI, 0.39 to 0.92). Only between 2.6% and 9.4% of patients had grade 3 HFS. There were no statistically significant differences in mean change from baseline in any of the QoL scores, the distribution of performance status, or the frequency of adverse events among the three arms. CONCLUSION: L-D could be considered a standard strategy in the attempt to prevent capecitabine-induced HFS.

Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of topical diclofenac in prevention of hand-foot syndrome in patients receiving capecitabine.

TPS12135 Background: The pathophysiology of capecitabine induced hand-foot syndrome (HFS) includes activation of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2, leading to an upregulation of the inflammatory cascade. Prophylaxis with oral celecoxib was previously reported to be associated with a significantly lower frequency of HFS (grade 1 [29.0% vs. 72.0%, p < 0.001] and grade 2 [11.8% vs. 30.0%, p=0.024]) (1). The findings were confirmed in a phase III trial (2). However, the associated systemic adverse events limit routine prophylactic use. Till date, no clinical trials have assessed the role of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in preventing HFS. Methods: In this investigator-initiated randomised phase III double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel group trial, a total of 264 patients with any stage breast or gastrointestinal cancer planned to receive capecitabine as a single agent or in combination with other chemotherapy will be randomised (1:1) to 1% topical diclofenac or placebo (base for 1% topical diclofenac) arm at a single tertiary care cancer centre in India. Randomization will be done by stratified (male vs female, and capecitabine mono therapy vs combination) permuted block method using a computer generated random sequence and allocation concealment will be done by using sealed opaque envelopes. In both the arms, patients will be asked to apply 1 fingertip unit (FTU) of topical medication on both surfaces of bilateral hands twice daily for a total duration of 12 weeks or till development of grade 2 or higher HFS, whichever is earlier. The primary objective is to compare the effect of topical diclofenac with placebo in preventing clinically significant HFS (incidence of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0 grade 2 or higher HFS). The secondary objectives include comparison of topical diclofenac with placebo on (i) incidence of NCI CTCv5.0 all grade HFS, (ii) time to develop grade ≥2 HFS from start of capecitabine, (iii) patient-reported outcomes using HFS-14 questionnaire (iv) adherence with topical application using self-reported adherence diary, (v) capecitabine dose reductions, delays and cessation due to HFS and (vi) safety profile (NCICTCv5.0). The tertiary correlative endpoint is to correlate the occurrence and severity of HFS with serum COX-2 levels and polymorphism of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPPD) enzyme. The trial is registered at the Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI/2021/01/030592). Till date, we have enrolled 12/264 patients. (1) Zhang RX et al. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2011;137(6):953-957. (2) Zhang RX et al. Annals of oncology. 2012;23(5):1348-1353. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2021/01/030592.

Pyridoxine for prevention of hand-foot syndrome caused by chemotherapy agents: a meta-analysis.

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a common systemic skin toxicity syndrome caused by chemotherapy agents. However, there is no uniform clinical treatment for HFS. It is reported that pyridoxine (vitamin B6) can be used to prevent HFS, but the evidence is insufficient. To determine whether pyridoxine can be used to prevent HFS caused by chemotherapy agents. Literature database searches were performed on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The efficacy of pyridoxine was evaluated by the incidence of HFS (any grade) or severe HFS (grade≥2). Fourteen studies involving 1570 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the pyridoxine and control groups in the prevention of HFS (OR=0.84, 95% CI 0.67-1.05, P=0.09) or in the incidence of grade ≥2 HFS (OR=0.87, 95% CI 0.70-1.09, P=0.39, respectively). The subgroup analysis of pyridoxine dose also showed no significant difference between the two groups in preventing HFS grade ≥2 (OR=0.79, 95% CI 0.62-0.99, P=0.30). We did not find adequate evidence to support the idea that the use of pyridoxine can prevent HFS and reduce the incidence of HFS grade ≥2. However, the preventive use of pyridoxine might have a tendency to reduce the incidence of HFS.

The effect of TJ-28 (Eppikajutsuto) on the prevention of hand-foot syndrome using Capecitabine for colorectal cancer: The Yokohama Clinical Oncology Group Study (YCOG1102)

Eppikajututo (TJ-28, a Kampo medicine) is effective against rheumatoid arthritis and eczema. We conducted a randomized comparative trial to assess the efficacy of TJ-28 for preventing hand-foot syndrome (HFS) as a complication of adjuvant chemotherapy using capecitabine. The present study was a multi-institutional randomized-controlled trial (UMIN000005899). Colorectal cancer patients scheduled to receive capecitabine chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy were randomly assigned to receive TJ-28 (7500mg/day) or oral pyridoxine (60mg/day). Patients were monitored for the development of grade ≥ 2 HFS according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria until chemotherapy completion. Twenty-two patients were enrolled in this study. The relative dose intensity of capecitabine was 76.2% in the TJ-28 group and 68.2% in the pyridoxine group. Grade ≥ 2 HFS developed in 6 (50.0%) of 12 TJ-28 patients and in 4 (40.0%) of 10 pyridoxine patients. Chemotherapy treatment failure was observed in seven patients, mainly due to HFS, liver dysfunction, diarrhea, and neutropenia. Chemotherapy treatment failure due to HFS occurred in none of the TJ-28 group and 2 patients (20.0%) in the pyridoxine group (p = 0.114). Capecitabine-associated HFS was not markedly prevented by TJ-28 compared with pyridoxine. However, TJ-28 might support the continuation of chemotherapy with capecitabine. Further studies are warranted to clarify the benefits of TJ-28.

Effect of an oral nutrition supplement on prevention of hand-foot syndrome in sorafenib for hepatocellular arcinoma

Effect of an oral nutrition supplement on prevention of hand-foot syndrome in sorafenib for hepatocellular arcinoma

MON-PP039: Effect of β-Hydroxy-β-Methylbutyric Acid, L-Glutamine, and L-Arginine on Prevention of Hand-Foot Syndrome in Sorafenib Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Non-Randomized Clinical Trial

MON-PP039: Effect of β-Hydroxy-β-Methylbutyric Acid, L-Glutamine, and L-Arginine on Prevention of Hand-Foot Syndrome in Sorafenib Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Non-Randomized Clinical Trial

Prevention of hand foot syndrome using an antioxidant containing ointment in patients treated with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin – a randomized placebo controlled double-blind study.

e20679 Background: Hand foot syndrome (HFS) or palmoplantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) is a dose-limiting cutaneous side effect with an incidence of up to 78% in patients treated with pegylated lipos...

Effect of moisturizers on prevention of hand-foot syndrome associated with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin.

681 Background: Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) has been established as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is the most common toxicity associated with capecitabine, and the mechanism of which remains to be clarified. Appropriate management of HFS for continuing treatment is needed to ensure improved survival. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of our candidate moisturizers for HFS, considering its compliance in each patient at a single institute. Methods: Patients who received XELOX for metastatic colorectal cancer at the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Cancer Institute Hospital, between Apr 1 2010 and Apr 30 2011 were included in this study. Pharmacists conducted the skin care for HFS using moisturizers: heparinoid ointment, a mixture of vitamin A oil and white petrolatums (1:1). All HFS events were graded according to NCI–CTC, version 4.0. The relationship between accumulated dose of capecitabine and incidence of HFS events stratified by frequency of daily moisturizers application was analyzed by using the Kaplan-Meier method. P value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: Moisturizers were applied two or more times a day in 45 patients (Good compliance group) and once a daily in 28 patients (Poor compliance group). In terms of incidence of grade ≥1 HFS, no significant differences were observed between good compliance group and poor compliance group (p = 0.764). Incidence of grade ≥2 HFS was observed slightly higher in the poor compliance group than in the good compliance group, though the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.286). Conclusions: The onset of capecitabine-associated HFS is independent of frequency of using moisturizers. However, more frequent application of moisturizers appeared to have a possibility to prevent severe HFS. Assessment for compliance with the moisturizers is important as well as patient-compliance-instruction by pharmacist.

Pyridoxine is not effective for the prevention of hand foot syndrome (HFS) associated with capecitabine therapy: Results of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study

9007 Introduction: Although pyridoxine has been used empirically for the prevention of HFS associated with capecitabine, its efficacy has not been proven yet. We performed a prospective randomized double-blind study to determine whether pyridoxine can prevent the development of HFS when given concurrently with capecitabine. Method: Chemotherapy-naive patients (pts) with gastrointestinal tract cancers who were going to have capecitabine-containing chemotherapy were randomized to receive either oral pyridoxine (200 mg/day) or placebo daily during chemotherapy after stratified by chemotherapy regimen: 1) capecitabine alone, 2) capecitabine and cisplatin, or 3) docetaxel, capecitabine, and cisplatin. The patients were observed until grade 2 or 3 HFS (by NCI CTC version 2.0) developed or capecitabine containing chemotherapy ended. When grade 2 or 3 HFS developed in pts in placebo group, the pts were randomized again to receive either pyridoxine or placebo for next cycle of chemotherapy in order to determine whether pyridoxine could improve the HFS. Result: From Jun 2004 to Oct 2005, total 389 pts were entered onto the study. But, 29 pts (15 in placebo group and 14 in pyridoxine group) were excluded from the study because of ineligibility or pts’ refusal. Pts’ characteristics were well balanced between the 2 groups. Grade 2 or 3 HFS developed in 55 of 180 (30.6%) pts in placebo group and in 57 of 180 (31.7%) pts in pyridoxine group. (p=0.788) The median cycles of chemotherapy to grade 2 or 3 HFS was 3 in both groups. The mean cumulative dose of capecitabine until occurrence of grade 2 or 3 HFS was not different statistically between the two groups. (221,157.5 mg/m2 vs. 259,808.5 mg/m2, p=0.788). Total 44 of 55 pts in placebo group who had grade 2 or 3 HFS were randomized to receive either placebo or pyridoxine at next cycle. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the proportion of pts with improvement of HFS (43% vs 48%, p=0.94). Conclusion: These results indicated that pyridoxine is not effective for the prevention of HFS associated with capecitabine therapy. No significant financial relationships to disclose.