An eicosapentaenoic acid supplement versus megestrol acetate versus both for patients with cancer-associated wasting: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group and National Cancer Institute of Canada collaborative effort. Effect of a protein and energy dense N-3 fatty acid enriched oral supplement on loss of weight and lean tissue in cancer cachexia: a randomised double blind trial. Eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester supplementation in cachectic cancer patients and healthy subjects: effects on lipolysis and lipid oxidation. Two double-blind placebo-controlled pilot studies of eicosapentaenoic acid in the treatment of schizophrenia. EPA supplementation improves teacher-rated behaviour and oppositional symptoms in children with ADHD. Controlled trial of megestrol acetate for the treatment of cancer anorexia and cachexia. Randomized phase III clinical trial of five different arms of treatment in 332 patients with cancer cachexia. Randomized, placebo-controlled study of ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid as supplemental treatment in schizophrenia. The effects of eicosapentaenoic acid in tardive dyskinesia: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Dietary supplementation with fish oil modifies renal reserve filtration capacity in postoperative, cyclosporin A-treated renal transplant recipients. Randomized comparison of megestrol acetate versus dexamethasone versus fluoxymesterone for the treatment of cancer anorexia/cachexia.
Studies suggest eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), an omega-3 fatty acid, augments weight, appetite, and survival in cancer-associated wasting. This study determined whether an EPA supplement-administered alone or with megestrol acetate (MA)-was more effective than MA.
                Four hundred twenty-one assessable patients with cancer-associated wasting were randomly assigned to an EPA supplement 1.09 g administered bid plus placebo; MA liquid suspension 600 mg/d plus an isocaloric, isonitrogenous supplement administered twice a day; or both. Eligible patients reported a 5-lb, 2-month weight loss and/or intake of less than 20 calories/kg/d.
                A smaller percentage taking the EPA supplement gained >or= 10% of baseline weight compared with those taking MA: 6% v 18%, respectively (P =.004). Combination therapy resulted in weight gain of >or= 10% in 11% of patients (P =.17 across all arms). The percentage of patients with appetite improvement (North Central Cancer Treatment Group Questionnaire) was not statistically different: 63%, 69%, and 66%, in EPA-, MA-, and combination-treated arms, respectively (P =.69). In contrast, 4-week Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy scores suggested MA-containing arms experienced superior appetite stimulation compared with the EPA arm, with scores of 40, 55, and 55 in EPA-, MA-, and combination-treated arms, respectively (P =.004). Survival was not significantly different among arms. Global quality of life was not significantly different among groups. With the exception of increased impotence in MA-treated patients, toxicity was comparable.
                This EPA supplement, either alone or in combination with MA, does not improve weight or appetite better than MA alone. N-3 fatty acids, especially eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), may possess anticachectic properties. This trial compared a protein and energy dense supplement enriched with n-3 fatty acids and antioxidants (experimental: E) with an isocaloric isonitrogenous control supplement (C) for their effects on weight, lean body mass (LBM), dietary intake, and quality of life in cachectic patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.
                A total of 200 patients (95 E; 105 C) were randomised to consume two cans/day of the E or C supplement (480 ml, 620 kcal, 32 g protein +/- 2.2 g EPA) for eight weeks in a multicentre, randomised, double blind trial.
                At enrolment, patients' mean rate of weight loss was 3.3 kg/month. Intake of the supplements (E or C) was below the recommended dose (2 cans/day) and averaged 1.4 cans/day. Over eight weeks, patients in both groups stopped losing weight (delta weight E: -0.25 kg/month versus C: -0.37 kg/month; p = 0.74) and LBM (Delta LBM E: +0.27 kg/month versus C: +0.12 kg/month; p = 0.88) to an equal degree (change from baseline E and C, p<0.001). In view of evident non-compliance in both E and C groups, correlation analyses were undertaken to examine for potential dose-response relationships. E patients demonstrated significant correlations between their supplement intake and weight gain (r = 0.50, p<0.001) and increase in LBM (r = 0.33, p = 0.036). Such correlations were not statistically significant in C patients. The relationship of supplement intake with change in LBM was significantly different between E and C patients (p = 0.043). Increased plasma EPA levels in the E group were associated with weight and LBM gain (r = 0.50, p<0.001; r = 0.51, p = 0.001). Weight gain was associated with improved quality of life (p<0.01) only in the E group.
                Intention to treat group comparisons indicated that at the mean dose taken, enrichment with n-3 fatty acids did not provide a therapeutic advantage and that both supplements were equally effective in arresting weight loss. Post hoc dose-response analysis suggests that if taken in sufficient quantity, only the n-3 fatty acid enriched energy and protein dense supplement results in net gain of weight, lean tissue, and improved quality of life. Further trials are required to examine the potential role of n-3 enriched supplements in the treatment of cancer cachexia. Recent reports suggest that weight loss in cachectic cancer patients may be inhibited by supplementation of the n-3 fatty acid eicosapentaenoic acid (20:5n-3; EPA), presumably due to inhibition of lipolysis. The aim of the present double-blind, randomized trial was to assess whether short-term oral EPA ethyl ester (EE) supplementation inhibits lipolysis and lipid oxidation in weight-losing cancer patients and in healthy subjects.
                Seventeen weight-losing, cancer patients of different tumor types, and 16 healthy subjects were randomized to receive EPA-EE (6 g/d) or placebo (oleic acid (OA)-EE; 6 g/d) for seven days. At baseline (day 0) and during supplementation (days 2 and 7) whole-body lipolysis and palmitic acid release were measured in the overnight fasting state using [1, 1, 2, 3, 3-(2)H(5)]glycerol and [1-(13)C]palmitic acid. Palmitate oxidation was determined by measuring(13)CO(2)enrichment in expired breath.
                No significant effects of EPA-EE on whole-body lipolysis, palmitic acid release, or palmitate oxidation were detected in cancer patients nor in healthy subjects in comparison with OA-EE. EPA-EE supplementation reduced plasma-free fatty acid and triacylglycerol concentrations significantly in healthy subjects but not in cancer patients.
                We conclude that supplementation of EPA-EE does not significantly inhibit lipolysis or lipid oxidation in weight-losing cancer patients or in healthy subjects during short-term supplementation when using OA-EE as a placebo supplement.
                Copyright 2000 Harcourt Publishers Ltd. Evidence that the metabolism of phospholipids and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) is abnormal in schizophrenia provided the rationale for intervention studies using PUFA supplementation. An initial open label study indicating efficacy for n-3 PUFA in schizophrenia led to two small double-blind pilot studies. The first study was designed to distinguish between the possible effects of two different n-3 PUFA: eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docohexaenoic acid (DHA). Forty-five schizophrenic patients on stable antipsychotic medication who were still symptomatic were treated with either EPA, DHA or placebo for 3 months. Improvement on EPA measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was statistically superior to both DHA and placebo using changes in percentage scores on the total PANSS. EPA was significantly superior to DHA for positive symptoms using ANOVA for repeated measures. In the second placebo-controlled study, EPA was used as a sole treatment, though the use of antipsychotic drugs was still permitted if this was clinically imperative. By the end of the study, all 12 patients on placebo, but only eight out of 14 patients on EPA, were taking antipsychotic drugs. Despite this, patients taking EPA had significantly lower scores on the PANSS rating scale by the end of the study. It is concluded that EPA may represent a new treatment approach to schizophrenia, and this requires investigation by large-scale placebo-controlled trials. Measure efficacy of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
                Randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 0.5 g EPA or placebo (15 weeks) in 92 children (7-12 years) with ADHD. Efficacy measure was Conners' Parent/Teacher Rating Scales (CPRS/CTRS). Fatty acids were analysed in serum phospholipids and red blood cell membranes (RBC) at baseline and endpoint with gas chromatography.
                EPA improved CTRS inattention/cognitive subscale (p = 0.04), but not Conners' total score. In oppositional children (n = 48), CTRS total score improved ≥25% in 48% of the children receiving EPA vs. 9% for placebo [effect size (ES) 0.63, p = 0.01]. In less hyperactive/impulsive children (n = 44), ≥25% improvement was seen in 36% vs. 18% (ES 0.41, n.s.), and with both these types of symptoms 8/13 with EPA vs. 1/9 for placebo improved ≥25% (p = 0.03). Children responding to treatment had lower EPA concentrations (p = 0.02), higher AA/EPA (p = 0.005) and higher AA/DHA ratios (p = 0.03) in serum at baseline. Similarly, AA/EPA (p = 0.01), AA/DHA (p = 0.038) and total omega-6/omega-3 ratios (p = 0.028) were higher in RBC, probably because of higher AA (p = 0.011).
                Two ADHD subgroups (oppositional and less hyperactive/impulsive children) improved after 15-week EPA treatment. Increasing EPA and decreasing omega-6 fatty acid concentrations in phospholipids were related to clinical improvement.
                © 2010 The Author(s)/Journal Compilation © 2010 Foundation Acta Paediatrica. Preliminary information has suggested that megestrol acetate leads to appetite stimulation and nonfluid weight gain in patients with breast cancer, other cancers, and AIDS. Pursuant to this, we developed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of megestrol acetate in patients with cancer-associated anorexia and cachexia. We randomly assigned 133 eligible patients to receive 800 mg of megestrol acetate per day or a placebo. Patients assigned to megestrol acetate more frequently reported improved appetite (P = .003) and food intake (P = .009) when compared with patients receiving the placebo. A weight gain of 15 lb or more over baseline was seen in 11 of 67 (16%) patients receiving megestrol acetate compared with one of 66 (2%) given the placebo (P = .003). Patients receiving megestrol acetate reported significantly less nausea (13% vs. 38%; P = .001) and emesis (8% vs. 25%, P = .009). No clinically or statistically significant toxic reactions were ascribed to megestrol acetate, with the exception of mild edema. This study convincingly demonstrated that megestrol acetate can stimulate appetite and food intake in patients with anorexia and cachexia associated with cancer, leading to significant weight gain in a proportion of such patients. A phase III, randomized study was carried out to establish the most effective and safest treatment to improve the primary endpoints of cancer cachexia-lean body mass (LBM), resting energy expenditure (REE), and fatigue-and relevant secondary endpoints: appetite, quality of life, grip strength, Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) and proinflammatory cytokines.
                Three hundred thirty-two assessable patients with cancer-related anorexia/cachexia syndrome were randomly assigned to one of five treatment arms: arm 1, medroxyprogesterone (500 mg/day) or megestrol acetate (320 mg/day); arm 2, oral supplementation with eicosapentaenoic acid; arm 3, L-carnitine (4 g/day); arm 4, thalidomide (200 mg/day); and arm 5, a combination of the above. Treatment duration was 4 months.
                Analysis of variance showed a significant difference between treatment arms. A post hoc analysis showed the superiority of arm 5 over the others for all primary endpoints. An analysis of changes from baseline showed that LBM (by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and by L3 computed tomography) significantly increased in arm 5. REE decreased significantly and fatigue improved significantly in arm 5. Appetite increased significantly in arm 5; interleukin (IL)-6 decreased significantly in arm 5 and arm 4; GPS and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) score decreased significantly in arm 5, arm 4, and arm 3. Toxicity was quite negligible, and was comparable between arms.
                The most effective treatment in terms of all three primary efficacy endpoints and the secondary endpoints appetite, IL-6, GPS, and ECOG PS score was the combination regimen that included all selected agents. The study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid (E-EPA) as add-on treatment in chronic, severe schizophrenia.
                A randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose, add-on study was conducted over 12 weeks. Forty patients with persistent symptoms after at least 6 months of stable antipsychotic treatment received E-EPA or placebo, in addition to their existing treatment.
                At 12 weeks, the E-EPA group had significantly greater reduction of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total scores and of dyskinesia scores than the placebo group.
                EPA may be an effective and well-tolerated add-on treatment in schizophrenia. Worldwide, conventional antipsychotic medication continues to be used extensively, and tardive dyskinesia (TD) remains a serious complication. The primary objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy of EPA versus placebo in reducing symptoms of TD.
                This was a 12-week, double-blinded, randomized study of ethyl-EPA 2g/day versus placebo as supplemental medication, in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, with established TD.
                Eighty-four subjects were randomized, of whom 77 were included in the analysis. Both the EPA and placebo groups displayed significant baseline to endpoint improvements in Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale dyskinesia scores, but there were no significant between-group differences (p=0.4). Response rates (>or=30% improvement in TD symptoms) also did not differ significantly between EPA-treated subjects (45%) and placebo-treated subjects (32%) (p=0.6). However, a post-hoc linear mixed model repeated measures analysis of variance indicated an effect for treatment group and duration of TD. The EPA-treated patients had significantly greater mean reductions in dyskinesia scores initially, although this was not sustained beyond 6 weeks.
                This trial failed to demonstrate an anti-dyskinetic effect for ethyl-EPA 2g/day on the primary efficacy measure. However, a modest and transient benefit is suggested in patients with more recent onset of TD. The lack of clear-cut efficacy could be explained on the basis of the dose of EPA being too low, the study being underpowered, TD being too chronic in the majority of cases, differences in dietary fatty acid intake, or that EPA lacks an anti-dyskinetic action. The effect of a daily supplementation of 6 g fish oil (30% C20:5 omega-3 = EPA and 20% C22:6 omega-3 = DHA) for 1 month on renal function variables was investigated in a placebo-controlled (6 g coconut oil), prospective, randomized, double-blind study in acute postoperative cyclosporin A (CyA)-treated renal transplant recipients. Seventeen patients ingested placebo capsules (EPA-) and 14 patients fish oil (EPA+). Renal function tests were performed using the simultaneous determination of 125I-iothalamate and 131I-hippuran clearances for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and effective renal plasma flow (ERPF), respectively. Renal reserve filtration capacity was assessed by dopamine infusion, amino acid infusion, and a combination of both stimuli. After 1 month there were no significant differences in rejection episodes, CyA dose, or CyA levels. In contrast to our earlier observations, serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, GFR, and ERPF did not differ between the EPA- and EPA+ groups. Filtration fraction (FF) differed significantly, being 0.21 in the EPA- group versus 0.26 in the EPA+ group. To exclude the possible influence of a rejection episode, the nonrejecting patients were analyzed separately, creating the subgroups EPA + re - and EPA - re -. These two groups were comparable in age, donor age, and GFR. The EPA + re-group had a significantly lower ERPF (164 ml/min per 1.73 m2) than the EPA-re- group (262 ml/min per 1.73 m2). FF was significantly higher in the EPA+ re-group (0.26) than in the EPA-re-group (0.21).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) Previous double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that both corticosteroids and progestational agents do partially alleviate cancer anorexia/cachexia. Pilot information suggested that an anabolic corticosteroid might also improve appetite in patients with cancer anorexia/cachexia. The current trial was developed to compare and contrast a progestational agent, a corticosteroid, and an anabolic corticosteroid for the treatment of cancer anorexia/cachexia.
                Patients suffering from cancer anorexia/cachexia were randomized to receive either dexamethasone 0. 75 mg qid, megestrol acetate 800 mg orally every day, or fluoxymesterone 10 mg orally bid. Patients were observed at monthly intervals to evaluate weight changes and drug toxicity. Patients also completed questionnaires at baseline and at monthly intervals to evaluate appetite and drug toxicities.
                Fluoxymesterone resulted in significantly less appetite enhancement and did not have a favorable toxicity profile. Megestrol acetate and dexamethasone caused a similar degree of appetite enhancement and similar changes in nonfluid weight status, with nonsignificant trends favoring megestrol acetate for both of these parameters. Dexamethasone was observed to have more corticosteroid-type toxicity and a higher rate of drug discontinuation because of toxicity and/or patient refusal than megestrol acetate (36% v 25%; P =.03). Megestrol acetate had a higher rate of deep venous thrombosis than dexamethasone (5% v 1%; P =.06).
                Whereas fluoxymesterone clearly seems to be an inferior choice for treating cancer anorexia/cachexia, megestrol acetate and dexamethasone have similar appetite stimulating efficacy but differing toxicity profiles.
There were insufficient data to establish whether oral EPA was better than placebo. Comparisons of EPA combined with a protein energy supplementation versus a protein energy supplementation (without EPA) in the presence of an appetite stimulant (Megestrol Acetate) provided no evidence that EPA improves symptoms associated with the cachexia syndrome often seen in patients with advanced cancer.