Is Clarithromycin a potential treatment for cachexia in lung cancer?
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Is Clarithromycin a potential treatment for cachexia in people with lung cancer?
IRAS ID
164202
Contact name
Andrew Wilcock
Contact email
Eudract number
2014-004873-18
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 6 months, 4 days
Research summary
Weight loss is present in 30–60% of patients with lung cancer at diagnosis.
Generally, weight loss occurs in the context of cancer cachexia (the loss of muscle mass).
It cannot be fully reversed by conventional nutritional support and may lead to progressive health problems.
Cachexia shortens survival and reduces independence. This may necessitate additional support from carers and hospital admission.
Some patients find that they do not tolerate chemotherapy treatment as a result of the loss of weight and they may need to stop treatment all together.
Although with greater understanding new drugs with various actions are emerging, currently no standard treatment exists, and cachexia is a major unmet need of people with lung cancer.
The maintenance of muscle mass is dependant upon a balance between the rate of production and the rate of breakdown of the muscle protein. Interventions which improve this protein production and/or reduce the protein breakdown should be of benefit.
Clarithromycin ( a widely available and cheap antibiotic) has been shown to reduce inflammation and reduce this protein breakdown . This may preserve body weight, physical function and increase survival.
We therefore wish to explore the benefits of using clarithromycin in patients with non small cell lung cancer and directly assess the effect on body mass.
In this study we will randomise patients to placebo or clarityromycin 250mg bd for 8 weeks and assess cancer cachexia using DEXA scanning, blood tests , physical function tests and quality of life questionnaires prior to and after the course of treatment.REC name
East Midlands - Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/EM/1281
Date of REC Opinion
13 Jan 2015
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion