RATIONALE: Methylphenidate may help relieve fatigue caused by cancer. It is not yet known whether methylphenidate is more effective than a placebo in relieving fatigue and improving quality of life in patients with cancer. PURPOSE: This randomized phase III trial is studying methylphenidate to see how well it works in treating patients with fatigue caused by cancer.
OBJECTIVES: Primary * Test the efficacy of long-acting methylphenidate in patients with cancer-related fatigue as measured using an item of the Brief Fatigue Inventory. Secondary * Evaluate the tolerability and adverse events associated with this drug in these patients. * Study the effect of this drug on quality of life (QOL)-related variables (vitality, sleep quality, overall QOL, QOL domains, other fatigue measures, and perceived treatment efficacy) in these patients. OUTLINE: This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. Patients are stratified according to disease stage (0, I, or II vs III or IV), level of fatigue at baseline (4-7 vs 8-10), concurrent biological therapy (yes vs no), concurrent chemotherapy (yes vs no), and concurrent radiotherapy (yes vs no). Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 treatment arms. * Arm I: Patients receive oral methylphenidate daily on days 1-28. * Arm II: Patients receive oral placebo daily on days 1-28. Patients in both arms complete questionnaires to assess their symptoms of fatigue, overall mood, quality of life, sleep quality, and adverse effects from treatment at baseline and once weekly for 4 weeks. Patients also complete a Symptom Experience Diary. McNeil Consumer \& Specialty Pharmaceuticals provided medication support for NCCTG N05C7. PROJECTED ACCRUAL: A total of 140 patients will be accrued for this study.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
148
Given orally
Given orally
Prorated AUC of Total Fatigue as Measured by the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) at Baseline and at Weeks 1-4
The prorated area under the curve (AUC) for the usual fatigue question of the BFI at baseline and at weeks 1-4 after being translated onto a 0 (poor quality of life (QOL) or bad symptoms) to 100 (best QOL or no symptoms) point scale was calculated as the following: 1. For those completed 4 weeks item: AUC/4; 2. For those completed up to week 3 item: (AUC \* 4) / 3; 3. For those completed up to week 2 item: AUC \* 2; 4. For those completed up to week 1 item: AUC \* 4; The prorated AUC scores were then transformed onto 0 to 100 point scale with 0 (poor QOL or bad symptoms) and 100 (best QOL or no symptoms) for analysis.
Time frame: Baseline to week 4
Severity of Adverse Events as Measured by the Symptom Experience Diary Based on Mean Changes From Baseline to Week 4
The Symptom Experience Diary (SED) consists of 12 items. All scores were translated onto a 0-100 point scale, with 0 represent poor quality of life (QOL) or bad symptom and 100 is best QOL or no symptoms.The change in severity of adverse events was calculated as subtracting the item scores at baseline from the scores at week 4.
Time frame: Baseline and Week 4
AUC of Sleep Quality as Measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index at Baseline and at Weeks 1-4
Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) consists of 19 items and 7 scales. The AUC for the overall PSQI at baseline and at weeks 1-4 after being translated onto a 0 to 100 point scale was calculated. Higher scores are better.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 4
AUC of Vitality as Measured by the Short Form-36 Vitality Subscale at Baseline and at Weeks 1-4
The SF-36 is a 36-item short form to measure health status in various populations. The vitality subscale is comprised of 4 items and is a measure of energy level as well as fatigue. The AUC for the vitality subscale at baseline and at weeks 1-4 after being translated onto a 0 to 100 point scale was calculated. Higher scores are better.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Mayo Clinic Scottsdale
Scottsdale, Arizona, United States
Aurora Presbyterian Hospital
Aurora, Colorado, United States
Boulder Community Hospital
Boulder, Colorado, United States
Penrose Cancer Center at Penrose Hospital
Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States
St. Anthony Central Hospital
Denver, Colorado, United States
Porter Adventist Hospital
Denver, Colorado, United States
Presbyterian - St. Luke's Medical Center
Denver, Colorado, United States
St. Joseph Hospital
Denver, Colorado, United States
Rose Medical Center
Denver, Colorado, United States
CCOP - Colorado Cancer Research Program
Denver, Colorado, United States
...and 228 more locations
Time frame: Baseline to Week 4
AUC of Overall Quality of Life (QOL) and QOL Domains as Measured by the Linear Analogue Self Assessment at Baseline and at Weeks 1-4
Linear Analogue Self Assessment (LASA) consists of 6 single-item numeric analogue scales. The AUC for the six-items at baseline and at weeks 1-4 after being translated onto a 0 to 100 point scale was calculated. Higher scores are better.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 4
AUC of Other Fatigue Scores as Measured by Items of the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) at Baseline and at Weeks 1-4
Area under the curve (AUC) for the other fatigue items of the BFI at baseline and at weeks 1-4 after being translated onto a 0 to 100 point scale was calculated. Higher scores are better.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 4
Anchor-based Minimally Important Difference in SGIC Overall Quality of Life Based on Mean Changes From Baseline to Week 4 on BFI Usual Fatigue
Perceived treatment efficacy was measured by the Subject Global Impression of Change (SGIC). The SGIC is a 3-point item in which the patient rates the change in the overall status since beginning the study drug (ranging from very much better, moderately better, a little better, about the same, a little worse, moderately worse, to very much worse). The average change in patient fatigue scores for those participants who express a perceived change of "a little better" via the SGIC scores were calculated. BFI usual fatigue item score was translated into 0 to 100 point scale for the analysis, with 0 (poor QOL or bad symptoms) and 100 (best QOL or no symptoms).
Time frame: Baseline and Week 4
Anchor-based Minimally Important Difference in SGIC Physical Condition Based on Mean Changes From Baseline to Week 4 on BFI Usual Fatigue
Perceived treatment efficacy was measured by the Subject Global Impression of Change (SGIC). The SGIC is a 3-point item in which the patient rates the change in the overall status since beginning the study drug (ranging from very much better, moderately better, a little better, about the same, a little worse, moderately worse, to very much worse). The average change in patient fatigue scores for those participants who express a perceived change of "a little better" via the SGIC scores were calculated. BFI usual fatigue item score was translated into 0 to 100 point scale for the analysis, with 0 (poor QOL or bad symptoms) and 100 (best QOL or no symptoms).
Time frame: Baseline and Week 4
Anchor-based Minimally Important Difference in SGIC Emotional State Based on Mean Changes From Baseline to Week 4 on BFI Usual Fatigue
Perceived treatment efficacy was measured by the Subject Global Impression of Change (SGIC). The SGIC is a 3-point item in which the patient rates the change in the overall status since beginning the study drug (ranging from very much better, moderately better, a little better, about the same, a little worse, moderately worse, to very much worse). The average change in patient fatigue scores for those participants who express a perceived change of "a little better" via the SGIC scores were calculated. BFI usual fatigue item score was translated into 0 to 100 point scale for the analysis, with 0 (poor QOL or bad symptoms) and 100 (best QOL or no symptoms).
Time frame: Baseline and Week 4