Impact of Funding Source on Clinical Trial Results Including Cardiovascular Outcome Trials.

Previous authors have suggested a higher likelihood for industry-sponsored (IS) studies to have positive outcomes than non-IS studies, though the influence of publication bias was believed to be a likely confounder. We attempted to control for the latter using a prepublication database to compare the primary outcome of recent trials based on sponsorship. We used the "advanced search" feature in the clinicaltrials.gov website to identify recently completed phase III studies involving the implementation of a pharmaceutical agent or device for which primary data were available. Studies were categorized as either National Institutes of Health (NIH) sponsored or IS. Results were labeled "favorable" if the results favored the intervention under investigation or "unfavorable" if the intervention fared worse than standard medical treatment. We also performed an independent literature search to identify the cardiovascular trials as a case example and again categorized them into IS versus NIH sponsored. A total of 226 studies sponsored by NIH were found. When these were compared with the latest 226 IS studies, it was found that IS studies were almost 4 times more likely to report a positive outcome (odds ratio [OR] 3.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6087 to 5.9680, p <0.0001). As a case example of a specialty, we also identified 25 NIH-sponsored and 215 IS cardiovascular trials, with most focusing on hypertension therapy (31.6%) and anticoagulation (17.9%). IS studies were 7 times more likely to report favorable outcomes (OR 7.54, 95% CI 2.19 to 25.94, p = 0.0014). They were also considerably less likely to report unfavorable outcomes (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.26, p <0.0001). In conclusion, the outcomes of large clinical studies especially cardiovascular differ considerably on the basis of their funding source, and publication bias appears to have limited influence on these findings.

Diversity index of mucosal resident T lymphocyte repertoire predicts clinical prognosis in gastric cancer

© 2015 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.A characteristic immunopathology of human cancers is the induction of tumor antigen-specific T lymphocyte responses within solid tumor tissues. Current strategies for immune monitoring focus on the quantification of the density and differentiation status of tumor-infiltrating T lymphocytes; however, properties of the TCR repertoire - including antigen specificity, clonality, as well as its prognostic significance β remain elusive. In this study, we enrolled 28 gastric cancer patients and collected tumor tissues, adjacent normal mucosal tissues, and peripheral blood samples to study the landscape and compartmentalization of these patients’ TCR β repertoire by deep sequencing analyses. Our results illustrated antigen-driven expansion within the tumor compartment and the contracted size of shared clonotypes in mucosa and peripheral blood. Most importantly, the diversity of mucosal T lymphocytes could independently predict prognosis, which strongly underscores critical roles of resident mucosal T-cells in executing post-surgery immunosurveillance against tumor relapse.

Clinical Insights Into the Biology and Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer.

Pancreatic cancer is a devastating disease with a universally poor prognosis. In 2015, it is estimated that there will be 48,960 new cases of pancreatic cancer and that 40,560 people will die of the disease. The 5-year survival rate is 7.2% for all patients with pancreatic cancer; however, survival depends greatly on the stage at diagnosis. Unfortunately, 53% of patients already have metastatic disease at diagnosis, which corresponds to a 5-year survival rate of 2.4%. Even for the 9% of patients with localized disease confined to the pancreas, the 5-year survival is still modest at only 27.1%. These grim statistics highlight the need for ways to identify cohorts of individuals at highest risk, methods to screen those at highest risk to identify preinvasive pathologic precursors, and development of effective systemic therapies. Recent clinical and translational progress has emphasized the relationship with diabetes, the role of the stroma, and the interplay of each of these with inflammation in the pathobiology of pancreatic cancer. In this article, we will discuss these relationships and how they might translate into novel management strategies for the treatment of this disease.

Clinical utility of a Web-enabled risk-assessment and clinical decision support program.

PURPOSE: Risk-stratified guidelines can improve quality of care and cost-effectiveness, but their uptake in primary care has been limited. MeTree, a Web-based, patient-facing risk-assessment and clinical decision support tool, is designed to facilitate uptake of risk-stratified guidelines. METHODS: A hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial of three clinics (two intervention, one control). PARTICIPANTS: consentable nonadopted adults with upcoming appointments. PRIMARY OUTCOME: agreement between patient risk level and risk management for those meeting evidence-based criteria for increased-risk risk-management strategies (increased risk) and those who do not (average risk) before MeTree and after. MEASURES: chart abstraction was used to identify risk management related to colon, breast, and ovarian cancer, hereditary cancer, and thrombosis. RESULTS: Participants = 488, female = 284 (58.2%), white = 411 (85.7%), mean age = 58.7 (SD = 12.3). Agreement between risk management and risk level for all conditions for each participant, except for colon cancer, which was limited to those <50 years of age, was (i) 1.1% (N = 2/174) for the increased-risk group before MeTree and 16.1% (N = 28/174) after and (ii) 99.2% (N = 2,125/2,142) for the average-risk group before MeTree and 99.5% (N = 2,131/2,142) after. Of those receiving increased-risk risk-management strategies at baseline, 10.5% (N = 2/19) met criteria for increased risk. After MeTree, 80.7% (N = 46/57) met criteria. CONCLUSION: MeTree integration into primary care can improve uptake of risk-stratified guidelines and potentially reduce "overuse" and "underuse" of increased-risk services.Genet Med 18 10, 1020-1028.

Utility of a molecular prescreening program in advanced colorectal cancer for enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Incorporation of multiple enrichment biomarkers into prospective clinical trials is an active area of investigation, but the factors that determine clinical trial enrollment following a molecular prescreening program have not been assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with 5-fluorouracil-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer at the MD Anderson Cancer Center were offered screening in the Assessment of Targeted Therapies Against Colorectal Cancer (ATTACC) program to identify eligibility for companion phase I or II clinical trials with a therapy targeted to an aberration detected in the patient, based on testing by immunohistochemistry, targeted gene sequencing panels, and CpG island methylation phenotype assays. RESULTS: Between August 2010 and December 2013, 484 patients were enrolled, 458 (95%) had a biomarker result, and 157 (32%) were enrolled on a clinical trial (92 on biomarker-selected and 65 on nonbiomarker selected). Of the 458 patients with a biomarker result, enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials was ninefold higher for predefined ATTACC-companion clinical trials as opposed to nonpredefined biomarker-selected clinical trials, 17.9% versus 2%, P < 0.001. Factors that correlated positively with trial enrollment in multivariate analysis were higher performance status, older age, lack of standard of care therapy, established patient at MD Anderson, and the presence of an eligible biomarker for an ATTACC-companion study. Early molecular screening did result in a higher rate of patients with remaining standard of care therapy enrolling on ATTACC-companion clinical trials, 45.1%, in contrast to nonpredefined clinical trials, 22.7%; odds ratio 3.1, P = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: Though early molecular prescreening for predefined clinical trials resulted in an increase rate of trial enrollment of nonrefractory patients, the majority of patients enrolled on clinical trials were refractory to standard of care therapy. Within molecular prescreening programs, tailoring screening for preidentified and open clinical trials, temporally linking screening to treatment and optimizing both patient and physician engagement are efforts likely to improve enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: The study NCT number is NCT01196130.

Prevalence and incidence of liver enzyme elevations in a pooled oncology clinical trial cohort.

Few epidemiologic studies describe longitudinal liver chemistry (LC) elevations in cancer patients. A population-based retrospective cohort was identified from 31 Phase 2-3 oncology trials (excluding targeted therapies) conducted from 1985 to 2005 to evaluate background rates of LC elevations in patients (n = 3998) with or without liver metastases. Patients with baseline liver metastases (29% of patients) presented with a 3% prevalence of alanine transaminase (ALT) ≥ 3x upper limits normal (ULN) and 0.2% prevalence of bilirubin ≥ 3xULN. During follow-up, the incidence (per 1000 person-months) of new onset ALT elevations ≥3xULN was 6.1 (95% CI: 4.5, 8.0) and 2.2 (95% CI: 0.9, 4.5) in patients without and with liver metastases, respectively. No new incident cases of ALT and bilirubin elevations suggestive of severe liver injury occurred among those with liver metastases; a single case occurred among those without metastasis. Regardless of the presence of liver metastases, LC elevations were rare in cancer patients during oncology trials, which may be due to enrollment criteria. Our study validates uniform thresholds for detection of LC elevations in oncology studies and serves as an empirical referent point for comparing liver enzyme abnormalities in oncology trials of novel targeted therapies. These data support uniform LC stopping criteria in oncology trials.