A randomized phase II clinical trial of a fasting-mimic diet prior to chemotherapy to evaluate the impact on toxicity and efficacy.

Authors

Tanya Dorff

Tanya B. Dorff

City of Hope, Duarte, CA

Tanya B. Dorff , Mahshid Shelechi , Irene Kang , Todd E Morgan , Susan G. Groshen , Sriram Yennu , Agustin A. Garcia , David I. Quinn , Valter Longo

Organizations

City of Hope, Duarte, CA, L-Nutra, Los Angeles, CA, LAC and University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USC Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, Los Angeles County Hospital/ University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, University of Southern California Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USC Davis School of Gerontology, Los Angeles, CA

Research Funding

NIH

Background: Chemotherapy toxicity impacts dose intensity as well as temporarily deteriorating quality of life; some toxicity can be permanent, such as neuropathy. We previously demonstrated that fasting induces Differential Stress Resistance and hypothesized that fasting may protect normal host cells from chemotherapy toxicity, while potentially sensitizing cancer cells to chemotherapy. A low calorie, low protein fasting-mimicking diet (FMD) may be more acceptable than pure fasting. We are studying whether FMD will reduce chemotherapy toxicity and/or enhance efficacy. Changes in glucose and insulin‐like growth factor 1 (IGF1) may mediate or be biomarkers for the protective effects of fasting and will be studied in the trial population. Methods: Randomized phase II in 2 parallel cohorts (Prostate, n = 60, Breast n = 60). Treatment: Arm A = restricted diet consumed 3 days prior to and 24 hours after chemotherapy for 4 cycles. Arm B = regular diet. Eligibility: breast cancer with AC or TC in neoadjuvant setting, prostate cancer treated with Docetaxel, up-front or for mCRPC. BMI > 18.5. Exclusion: Diabetes Mellitus. Endpoints: Primary: Grade 2+ non-hematologic symptomatic toxicities experienced during 4 courses; additionally, radiographic (RECIST) response and PSA changes. Secondary: toxicity (all grade 2-4 events, dose reductions/delays) and efficacy (pathologic response for breast cancer, PSA/RECIST response for prostate cancer). Biomarker: plasma insulin, glucose, IGF1 and IGF binding protein (IGFBP) at baseline, and each cycle. Statistics: Proportion of patients with grade 2-4 symptomatic toxicities will be compared between treatment arms using stratified Mantel-Haenszel test; p-value ≤ 0.20 indicates the diet intervention is promising. With 60 patients in each cohort there is 88% power; initial analyses will evaluate breast/prostate cancer separately, yielding standard error no more than +/- 0.18 for estimates of the difference in the proportions of patients who experience a specific toxicity (or the composite). Quality of life will be assessed with SWOG questionnaire on day 1 of each chemotherapy cycle. Progress: 70 of 120 planned subjects have been accrued. Clinical trial information: NCT01802346

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2018 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Patient and Survivor Care

Track

Patient and Survivor Care

Sub Track

Palliative Care and Symptom Management

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT01802346

Citation

J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl; abstr TPS10132)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2018.36.15_suppl.TPS10132

Abstract #

TPS10132

Poster Bd #

116b

Abstract Disclosures