No abstract

IMPORTANCE Chemotherapy may induce alopecia. Although scalp cooling devices have been used to prevent this alopecia, efficacy has not been assessed in a randomized clinical trial.OBJECTIVES To assess whether a scalp cooling device is effective at reducing chemotherapy-induced alopecia and to assess adverse treatment effects. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSMulticenter randomized clinical trial of women with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Patients were enrolled from December 9, 2013, to September 30, 2016. One interim analysis was planned to allow the study to stop early for efficacy. Data reported are from the interim analysis. This study was conducted at 7 sites in the United States, and 182 women with breast cancer requiring chemotherapy were enrolled and randomized.INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized to scalp cooling (n = 119) or control (n = 63). Scalp cooling was done using a scalp cooling device. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary efficacy end points were successful hair preservation assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 scale (grade 0 [no hair loss] or grade 1 [<50% hair loss not requiring a wig] were considered to have hair preservation) at the end of 4 cycles of chemotherapy by a clinician unaware of treatment assignment, and device safety. Secondary end points included wig use and scores on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and a summary scale of the Body Image Scale.RESULTS At the time of the interim analysis, 142 participants were evaluable. The mean (SD) age of the patients was 52.6 (10.1) years; 36% (n = 51) received anthracycline-based chemotherapy and 64% (n = 91) received taxane-based chemotherapy. Successful hair preservation was found in 48 of 95 women with cooling (50.5%; 95% CI, 40.7%-60.4%) compared with 0 of 47 women in the control group (0%; 95% CI, 0%-7.6%) (success rate difference, 50.5%; 95% CI, 40.5%-60.6%). Because the 1-tailed P value from the Fisher exact test was <.001, which crossed the superiority boundary (P = .0061), the data and safety monitoring board recommended study termination on September 26, 2016. There were no statistically significant differences in changes in any of the scales of quality of life from baseline to chemotherapy cycle 4 among the scalp cooling and control groups. Only adverse events related to device use were collected; 54 adverse events were reported in the cooling group, all grades 1 and 2. There were no serious adverse device events.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among women with stage I to II breast cancer receiving chemotherapy with a taxane, anthracycline, or both, those who underwent scalp cooling were significantly more likely to have less than 50% hair loss after the fourth chemotherapy cycle compared with those who received no scalp cooling. Further research is needed to assess longer-term efficacy and adverse effects.

Purpose To evaluate the impact of the addition of bortezomib to rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) on outcomes in previously untreated patients with non-germinal center B-cell-like (non-GCB) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Patients and Methods After real-time determination of non-GCB DLBCL using the Hans immunohistochemistry algorithm, 206 patients were randomly assigned (1:1; stratified by International Prognostic Index [IPI] score) to six 21-day cycles of standard R-CHOP alone or R-CHOP plus bortezomib 1.3 mg/m intravenously on days 1 and 4 (VR-CHOP). The primary end point, progression-free survival (PFS), was evaluated in 183 patients with centrally confirmed non-GCB DLBCL who received one or more doses of study drug (91 R-CHOP, 92 VR-CHOP). Results After a median follow-up of 34 months, with 25% (R-CHOP) and 18% (VR-CHOP) of patients having had PFS events, the hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.73 (90% CI, 0.43 to 1.24) with VR-CHOP ( P = .611). Two-year PFS rates were 77.6% with R-CHOP and 82.0% with VR-CHOP; they were 65.1% versus 72.4% in patients with high-intermediate/high IPI (HR, 0.67; 90% CI, 0.34 to 1.29), and 90.0% versus 88.9% (HR, 0.85; 90% CI, 0.35 to 2.10) in patients with low/low-intermediate IPI. Overall response rate with R-CHOP and VR-CHOP was 98% and 96%, respectively. The overall survival HR was 0.75 (90% CI, 0.38 to 1.45); 2-year survival rates were 88.4% and 93.0%, respectively. In the safety population (100 R-CHOP and 101 VR-CHOP patients), grade ≥ 3 adverse events included neutropenia (53% v 49%), thrombocytopenia (13% v 29%), anemia (7% v 15%), leukopenia (26% v 25%), and neuropathy (1% v 5%). Conclusion Outcomes for newly diagnosed, prospectively enrolled patients with non-GCB DLBCL were more favorable than expected with R-CHOP and were not significantly improved by adding bortezomib.