skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Does Zinc Sulfate Prevent Therapy-Induced Taste Alterations in Head and Neck Cancer Patients? Results of Phase III Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (N01C4)

Abstract

Purpose: Taste alterations (dysgeusia) are well described in head and neck cancer patients who undergo radiotherapy (RT). Anecdotal observations and pilot studies have suggested zinc may mitigate these symptoms. This multi-institutional, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to provide definitive evidence of this mineral's palliative efficacy. Methods and Materials: A total of 169 evaluable patients were randomly assigned to zinc sulfate 45 mg orally three times daily vs. placebo. Treatment was to be given throughout RT and for 1 month after. All patients were scheduled to receive {>=}2,000 cGy of external beam RT to {>=}30% of the oral cavity, were able to take oral medication, and had no oral thrush at study entry. Changes in taste were assessed using the previously validated Wickham questionnaire. Results: At baseline, the groups were comparable in age, gender, and planned radiation dose (<6,000 vs. {>=}6,000 cGy). Overall, 61 zinc-treated (73%) and 71 placebo-exposed (84%) patients described taste alterations during the first 2 months (p = 0.16). The median interval to taste alterations was 2.3 vs. 1.6 weeks in the zinc-treated and placebo-exposed patients, respectively (p = 0.09). The reported taste alterations included the absence of any taste (16%), bitter taste (8%), salty taste (5%), sourmore » taste (4%), sweet taste (5%), and the presence of a metallic taste (10%), as well as other descriptions provided by a write in response (81%). Zinc sulfate did not favorably affect the interval to taste recovery. Conclusion: Zinc sulfate, as prescribed in this trial, did not prevent taste alterations in cancer patients who were undergoing RT to the oral pharynx.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [1];  [3];  [5];  [6];  [7];  [8];  [9];  [3]
  1. Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ (United States)
  2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (United States). E-mail: Jatoi.aminah@mayo.edu
  3. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (United States)
  4. Upstate Carolina CCOP, Spartanburg, SC (United States)
  5. Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL (United States)
  6. Missouri Valley Consortium, Omaha, NB (United States)
  7. Illinois Oncology Research Consortium, Omaha, NB (United States)
  8. Wichita Community Clinical Oncology Program, Wichita, KS (United States)
  9. Michigan Cancer Consortium, Ann Arbor, MI (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
20951573
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics; Journal Volume: 67; Journal Issue: 5; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.046; PII: S0360-3016(06)03384-0; Copyright (c) 2007 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; HEAD; NECK; NEOPLASMS; ORAL CAVITY; PATIENTS; PHARYNX; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; SYMPTOMS; ZINC SULFATES

Citation Formats

Halyard, Michele Y., Jatoi, Aminah, Sloan, Jeff A., Bearden, James D., Vora, Sujay A., Atherton, Pamela J., Perez, Edith A., Soori, Gammi, Zalduendo, Anthony C., Zhu, Angela, Stella, Philip J., and Loprinzi, Charles L. Does Zinc Sulfate Prevent Therapy-Induced Taste Alterations in Head and Neck Cancer Patients? Results of Phase III Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (N01C4). United States: N. p., 2007. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.046.
Halyard, Michele Y., Jatoi, Aminah, Sloan, Jeff A., Bearden, James D., Vora, Sujay A., Atherton, Pamela J., Perez, Edith A., Soori, Gammi, Zalduendo, Anthony C., Zhu, Angela, Stella, Philip J., & Loprinzi, Charles L. Does Zinc Sulfate Prevent Therapy-Induced Taste Alterations in Head and Neck Cancer Patients? Results of Phase III Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (N01C4). United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.046.
Halyard, Michele Y., Jatoi, Aminah, Sloan, Jeff A., Bearden, James D., Vora, Sujay A., Atherton, Pamela J., Perez, Edith A., Soori, Gammi, Zalduendo, Anthony C., Zhu, Angela, Stella, Philip J., and Loprinzi, Charles L. Sun . "Does Zinc Sulfate Prevent Therapy-Induced Taste Alterations in Head and Neck Cancer Patients? Results of Phase III Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (N01C4)". United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.046.
@article{osti_20951573,
title = {Does Zinc Sulfate Prevent Therapy-Induced Taste Alterations in Head and Neck Cancer Patients? Results of Phase III Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (N01C4)},
author = {Halyard, Michele Y. and Jatoi, Aminah and Sloan, Jeff A. and Bearden, James D. and Vora, Sujay A. and Atherton, Pamela J. and Perez, Edith A. and Soori, Gammi and Zalduendo, Anthony C. and Zhu, Angela and Stella, Philip J. and Loprinzi, Charles L.},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Taste alterations (dysgeusia) are well described in head and neck cancer patients who undergo radiotherapy (RT). Anecdotal observations and pilot studies have suggested zinc may mitigate these symptoms. This multi-institutional, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to provide definitive evidence of this mineral's palliative efficacy. Methods and Materials: A total of 169 evaluable patients were randomly assigned to zinc sulfate 45 mg orally three times daily vs. placebo. Treatment was to be given throughout RT and for 1 month after. All patients were scheduled to receive {>=}2,000 cGy of external beam RT to {>=}30% of the oral cavity, were able to take oral medication, and had no oral thrush at study entry. Changes in taste were assessed using the previously validated Wickham questionnaire. Results: At baseline, the groups were comparable in age, gender, and planned radiation dose (<6,000 vs. {>=}6,000 cGy). Overall, 61 zinc-treated (73%) and 71 placebo-exposed (84%) patients described taste alterations during the first 2 months (p = 0.16). The median interval to taste alterations was 2.3 vs. 1.6 weeks in the zinc-treated and placebo-exposed patients, respectively (p = 0.09). The reported taste alterations included the absence of any taste (16%), bitter taste (8%), salty taste (5%), sour taste (4%), sweet taste (5%), and the presence of a metallic taste (10%), as well as other descriptions provided by a write in response (81%). Zinc sulfate did not favorably affect the interval to taste recovery. Conclusion: Zinc sulfate, as prescribed in this trial, did not prevent taste alterations in cancer patients who were undergoing RT to the oral pharynx.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.046},
journal = {International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics},
number = 5,
volume = 67,
place = {United States},
year = {Sun Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007},
month = {Sun Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007}
}
  • Purpose: Based on early clinical evidence of potential mucosal protection by granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study to test the efficacy and safety of GM-CSF in reducing the severity and duration of mucosal injury and pain (mucositis) associated with curative radiotherapy (RT) in head-and-neck cancer patients. Methods and Materials: Eligible patients included those with head-and-neck cancer with radiation ports encompassing >50% of oral cavity and/or oropharynx. Standard RT ports were used to cover the primary tumor and regional lymphatics at risk in standard fractionation to 60-70 Gy. Concurrent cisplatin chemotherapymore » was allowed. Patients were randomized to receive subcutaneous injection of GM-CSF 250 {mu}g/m{sup 2} or placebo 3 times a week. Mucosal reaction was assessed during the course of RT using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria and the protocol-specific scoring system. Results: Between October 2000 and September 2002, 130 patients from 36 institutions were accrued. Nine patients (7%) were excluded from the analysis, 3 as a result of drug unavailability. More than 80% of the patients participated in the quality-of-life endpoint of this study. The GM-CSF did not cause any increase in toxicity compared with placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in the average mean mucositis score in the GM-CSF and placebo arms by a t test (p = 0.4006). Conclusion: This placebo-controlled, randomized study demonstrated no significant effect of GM-CSF given concurrently compared with placebo in reducing the severity or duration of RT-induced mucositis in patients undergoing definitive RT for head-and-neck cancer.« less
  • Purpose: A two-arm, double-blind, randomized trial was performed to evaluate the effect of 0.1% mometasone furoate (MMF) on acute skin-related toxicity in patients undergoing breast or chest wall radiotherapy. Methods and Materials: Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast carcinoma who were undergoing external beam radiotherapy to the breast or chest wall were randomly assigned to apply 0.1% MMF or placebo cream daily. The primary study endpoint was the provider-assessed maximal grade of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0, radiation dermatitis. The secondary endpoints included provider-assessed Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Grade 3 or greatermore » radiation dermatitis and adverse event monitoring. The patient-reported outcome measures included the Skindex-16, the Skin Toxicity Assessment Tool, a Symptom Experience Diary, and a quality-of-life self-assessment. An assessment was performed at baseline, weekly during radiotherapy, and for 2 weeks after radiotherapy. Results: A total of 176 patients were enrolled between September 21, 2007, and December 7, 2007. The provider-assessed primary endpoint showed no difference in the mean maximum grade of radiation dermatitis by treatment arm (1.2 for MMF vs. 1.3 for placebo; p = .18). Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events toxicity was greater in the placebo group (p = .04), primarily from pruritus. For the patient-reported outcome measures, the maximum Skindex-16 score for the MMF group showed less itching (p = .008), less irritation (p = .01), less symptom persistence or recurrence (p = .02), and less annoyance with skin problems (p = .04). The group's maximal Skin Toxicity Assessment Tool score showed less burning sensation (p = .02) and less itching (p = .002). Conclusion: Patients receiving daily MMF during radiotherapy might experience reduced acute skin toxicity compared with patients receiving placebo.« less
  • Purpose: Acute radiation proctitis is the most relevant complication of pelvic radiation and is still mainly treated supportively. Considering the negative impact of acute proctitis symptoms on patients' daily activities and the potential relationship between the severity of acute radiation injury and late damage, misoprostol was tested in the prevention of acute radiation-induced proctitis. Methods and Materials: A total of 100 patients who underwent radiotherapy for prostate cancer were entered into this phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study with misoprostol or placebo suppositories. Radiation-induced toxicity was evaluated weekly during radiotherapy using the Common Toxicity Criteria. Results: Between the placebo andmore » the misoprostol groups, no significant differences in proctitis symptoms occurred: 76% of patients in each group had Grade 1 toxicity, and 26% in the placebo group and 36% in the misoprostol group had Grade 2 toxicity. No differences were found in onset or symptom duration. Comparing the peak incidence of patients' toxicity symptoms, significantly more patients experienced rectal bleeding in the misoprostol group (p = 0.03). Conclusion: Misoprostol given as a once-daily suppository did not decrease the incidence and severity of radiation-induced acute proctitis and may increase the incidence of acute bleeding.« less
  • Purpose: The quality of life (QOL) and neurocognitive function of patients with brain tumors are negatively affected by the symptoms of their disease and brain radiation therapy (RT). We assessed the effect of prophylactic d-threo-methylphenidate HCl (d-MPH), a central nervous system (CNS) stimulant on QOL and cognitive function in patients undergoing RT. Methods and Materials: Sixty-eight patients with primary or metastatic brain tumors were randomly assigned to receive d-MPH or placebo. The starting dose of d-MPH was 5 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) and was escalated by 5 mg b.i.d. to a maximum of 15 mg b.i.d. The placebo was administeredmore » as one pill b.i.d. escalating three pills b.i.d. The primary outcome was fatigue. Patients were assessed at baseline, the end of radiation therapy, and 4, 8, and 12 weeks after brain RT using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy with brain and fatigue (FACIT-F) subscales, as well as the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Scale and Mini-Mental Status Exam. Results: The Mean Fatigue Subscale Score at baseline was 34.7 for the d-MPH arm and 33.3 for the placebo arm (p = 0.61). At 8 weeks after the completion of brain RT, there was no difference in fatigue between patient groups. The adjusted least squares estimate of the Mean Fatigue Subscale Score was 33.7 for the d-MPH and 35.6 for the placebo arm (p = 0.64). Secondary outcomes were not different between the two treatment arms. Conclusions: Prophylactic use of d-MPH in brain tumor patients undergoing RT did not result in an improvement in QOL.« less
  • Purpose: Considerable interobserver variability exists among providers and between providers and patients when measuring subjective symptoms. In the recently published Phase III N06C4 trial of mometasone cream vs. placebo to prevent radiation dermatitis, the primary provider-assessed (PA) endpoint, using the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), was negative. However, prospectively planned secondary analyses of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), using the Skindex-16 and Skin Toxicity Assessment Tool (STAT), were positive. This study assesses the relationship between PA outcomes and PROs. Methods and Materials: Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to compare the three tools. Statistical correlations were defined as follows: <0.5, mild;more » 0.5-0.7, moderate; and >0.7, strong. Results: CTCAE dermatitis moderately correlated with STAT erythema, and CTCAE pruritus strongly correlated with STAT itching. CTCAE pruritus had a moderate correlation with Skindex-16 itching. Comparing the 2 PRO tools, Skindex-16 itching correlated moderately with STAT itching. Skindex-16 burning, hurting, irritation, and persistence all showed the strongest correlation with STAT burning; they showed moderate correlations with STAT itching and tenderness. Conclusions: The PRO Skindex-16 correlated well with the PRO portions of STAT, but neither tool correlated well with CTCAE. PROs delineated a wider spectrum of toxicity than PA measures and provided more information on rash, redness, pruritus, and annoyance measures compared with CTCAE findings of rash and pruritus. PROs may provide a more complete measure of patient experience than single-symptom, PA endpoints in clinical trials assessing radiation skin toxicity.« less