279 resultados para Phase-III Trial
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare posttreatment seizure severity in a phase III clinical trial of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as adjunctive treatment of refractory partial-onset seizures. METHODS: The Seizure Severity Questionnaire (SSQ) was administered at baseline and posttreatment. The SSQ total score (TS) and component scores (frequency and helpfulness of warning signs before seizures [BS]; severity and bothersomeness of ictal movement and altered consciousness during seizures [DS]; cognitive, emotional, and physical aspects of postictal recovery after seizures [AS]; and overall severity and bothersomeness [SB]) were calculated for the per-protocol population. Analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline scores, estimated differences in posttreatment least square means between treatment arms. RESULTS: Out of 547 per-protocol patients, 441 had valid SSQ TS both at baseline and posttreatment. Mean posttreatment TS for ESL 1200mg/day was significantly lower than that for placebo (2.68 vs 3.20, p<0.001), exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID: 0.48). Mean DS, AS, and SB were also significantly lower with ESL 1200mg/day; differences in AS and SB exceeded the MCIDs. The TS, DS, AS, and SB were lower for ESL 800mg/day than for placebo; only SB was significant (p=0.013). For both ESL arms combined versus placebo, mean scores differed significantly for TS (p=0.006), DS (p=0.031), and SB (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic ESL doses led to clinically meaningful, dose-dependent reductions in seizure severity, as measured by SSQ scores. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study presents Class I evidence that adjunctive ESL (800 and 1200mg/day) led to clinically meaningful, dose-dependent seizure severity reductions, measured by the SSQ.
Resumo:
Aim: One standard option in the treatment of stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC is neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. We investigated in a randomized trial whether the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy would improve the outcome. Here we present the final results of this study. Methods: Patients (pts.) with pathologically proven, resectable stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC, performance status 0-1, and adequate organ function were randomized 1:1 to chemoradiation (CRT) with 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 and docetaxel 85 mg/m2 d1, q3weeks) followed by accelerated concomitant boost radiotherapy (RT) with 44 Gy in 22 fractions in 3 weeks, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (CT), with subsequent surgery for all pts. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). Results: 232 pts. were randomized in 23 centers, the median follow-up was 53 months. Two thirds were men, median age was 60 years (range 37-76). Histology was squamous cell in 33%, adenocarcinoma in 43%. Response rate to CRT was 61% vs. 44% with CT. 85% of all pts. underwent surgery, 30-day postoperative mortality was 1%. The rate of complete resection was 91% (CRT) vs. 81% (CT) and the pathological complete remission (pCR) rate was 16% vs. 12%. The median EFS was 13.1 months (95% CI 9.9 - 23.5) for the CRT group vs. 11.8 months (95% CI 8.4 - 15.2) in the CT arm (p 0.665). The median overall survival (OS) with CRT was 37.1 months (95% CI 22.6 -50), with CT 26.1 months ( 95% CI 26.1 - 52.1, p 0.938). The local failure rate was 23% in both arms. In the CT arm 12 pts. were given postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for R1 resection, 6 pts. received PORT in violation of the protocol. Pts. with a pCR, mediastinal downstaging to ypN0/1 and complete resection had a better outcome. Toxicity of chemotherapy was substantial, especially febrile neutropenia was common, whereas RT was well tolerated. Conclusions: This is the first completed phase III trial to evaluate the role of induction chemoradiotherapy and surgery, in comparison to neoadjuvant CT alone followed by surgery. RT was active, it increased response, complete resection and pCR rates. However, this failed to translate into an improvement of local control, EFS or OS. Notably, surgery after induction treatment was safe, including pneumonectomy. The overall survival rates of our neoadjuvant regimen are very encouraging, especially for a multicenter setting. Disclosure: M. Pless: Advisory Board for Sanofi; R. Cathomas: Advisory Board Sanofi D.C. Betticher: Advisory Board Sanofi. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resumo:
NovoTTF-100A (TTF) is a portable device delivering low-intensity, intermediate-frequency, alternating electric fields using noninvasive, disposable scalp electrodes. TTF interferes with tumor cell division, and it has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) based on data from a phase III trial. This presentation describes the updated survival data 2 years after completing recruitment. Adults with rGBM (KPS ≥ 70) were randomized (stratified by surgery and center) to either continuous TTF (20-24 h/day, 7 days/week) or efficacious chemotherapy based on best physician choice (BPC). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were PFS6, 1-year survival, and QOL. Patients were randomized (28 US and European centers) to either TTF alone (n ¼ 120) or BPC (n ¼ 117). Patient characteristics were balanced, median age was 54 years (range, 23-80 years), and median KPS was 80 (range, 50-100). One quarter of the patients had debulking surgery, and over half of the patients were at their second or later recurrence. OS in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population was equivalent in TTF versus BPC patients (median OS, 6.6vs. 6.0 months; n ¼ 237; p ¼ 0.26; HR ¼ 0.86). With a median follow-up of 33.6 months, long-term survival in the TTF group was higher than that in the BPC group at 2, 3, and 4 years of follow-up (9.3% vs. 6.6%; 8.4% vs. 1.4%; 8.4% vs. 0.0%, respectively). Analysis of patients who received at least one treatment course demonstrated a survival benefit for TTF patients compared to BPC patients (median OS, 7.8 vs. 6.0 months; n ¼ 93 vs. n ¼ 117; p ¼ 0.012; HR ¼ 0.69). In this group, 1-year survival was 28% vs. 20%, and PFS6 was 26.2% vs. 15.2% (p ¼ 0.034). TTF, a noninvasive, novel cancer treatment modality shows significant therapeutic efficacy with promising long-term survival results. The impact of TTF was more pronounced when comparing only patients who received the minimal treatment course. A large-scale phase III trial in newly diagnosed GBM is ongoing.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: In 2004, a randomised phase III trial by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC) reported improved median and 2-year survival for patients with glioblastoma treated with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide and radiotherapy. We report the final results with a median follow-up of more than 5 years. METHODS: Adult patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were randomly assigned to receive either standard radiotherapy or identical radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide followed by up to six cycles of adjuvant temozolomide. The methylation status of the methyl-guanine methyl transferase gene, MGMT, was determined retrospectively from the tumour tissue of 206 patients. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00006353. FINDINGS: Between Aug 17, 2000, and March 22, 2002, 573 patients were assigned to treatment. 278 (97%) of 286 patients in the radiotherapy alone group and 254 (89%) of 287 in the combined-treatment group died during 5 years of follow-up. Overall survival was 27.2% (95% CI 22.2-32.5) at 2 years, 16.0% (12.0-20.6) at 3 years, 12.1% (8.5-16.4) at 4 years, and 9.8% (6.4-14.0) at 5 years with temozolomide, versus 10.9% (7.6-14.8), 4.4% (2.4-7.2), 3.0% (1.4-5.7), and 1.9% (0.6-4.4) with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.7; p<0.0001). A benefit of combined therapy was recorded in all clinical prognostic subgroups, including patients aged 60-70 years. Methylation of the MGMT promoter was the strongest predictor for outcome and benefit from temozolomide chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Benefits of adjuvant temozolomide with radiotherapy lasted throughout 5 years of follow-up. A few patients in favourable prognostic categories survive longer than 5 years. MGMT methylation status identifies patients most likely to benefit from the addition of temozolomide. FUNDING: EORTC, NCIC, Nélia and Amadeo Barletta Foundation, Schering-Plough.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Thymostimulin is a thymic peptide fraction with immune-mediated cytotoxicity against hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in vitro and palliative efficacy in advanced HCC in two independent phase II trials. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of thymostimulin in a phase III trial. METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter clinical phase III trial. Between 10/2002 and 03/2005, 135 patients with locally advanced or metastasised HCC (Karnofsky >or=60%/Child-Pugh <or= 12) were randomised to receive thymostimulin 75 mg s.c. 5x/week or placebo stratified according to liver function. Primary endpoint was twelve-month survival, secondary endpoints overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), tumor response, safety and quality of life. A subgroup analysis according to liver function, KPS and tumor stage (Okuda, CLIP and BCLC) formed part of the protocol. RESULTS: Twelve-month survival was 28% [95%CI 17-41; treatment] and 32% [95%CI 19-44; control] with no significant differences in median OS (5.0 [95% CI 3.7-6.3] vs. 5.2 [95% CI 3.5-6.9] months; p = 0.87, HR = 1.04 [95% CI 0.7-1.6]) or TTP (5.3 [95%CI 2.0-8.6] vs. 2.9 [95%CI 2.6-3.1] months; p = 0.60, HR = 1.13 [95% CI 0.7-1.8]). Adjustment for liver function, Karnofsky status or tumor stage did not affect results. While quality of life was similar in both groups, fewer patients on thymostimulin suffered from accumulating ascites and renal failure. CONCLUSIONS: In our phase III trial, we found no evidence of any benefit to thymostimulin in the treatment of advanced HCC and there is therefore no justification for its use as single-agent treatment. The effect of thymostimulin on hepato-renal function requires further confirmation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN64487365.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Sunitinib (SU) is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antitumor and antiangiogenic activity. The objective of this trial was to demonstrate antitumor activity of continuous SU treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Key eligibility criteria included unresectable or metastatic HCC, no prior systemic anticancer treatment, measurable disease, and Child-Pugh class A or mild Child-Pugh class B liver dysfunction. Patients received 37.5 mg SU daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 12 weeks (PFS12). RESULTS: Forty-five patients were enrolled. The median age was 63 years; 89% had Child-Pugh class A disease and 47% had distant metastases. PFS12 was rated successful in 15 patients (33%; 95% confidence interval, 20%-47%). Over the whole trial period, one complete response and a 40% rate of stable disease as the best response were achieved. The median PFS duration, disease stabilization duration, time to progression, and overall survival time were 1.5, 2.9, 1.5, and 9.3 months, respectively. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were infrequent. None of the 33 deaths were considered drug related. CONCLUSION: Continuous SU treatment with 37.5 mg daily is feasible and has moderate activity in patients with advanced HCC and mild to moderately impaired liver dysfunction. Under this trial design (>13 PFS12 successes), the therapy is considered promising. This is the first trial describing the clinical effects of continuous dosing of SU in HCC patients on a schedule that is used in an ongoing, randomized, phase III trial in comparison with the current treatment standard, sorafenib (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00699374).
Resumo:
PURPOSE: This randomized phase II trial evaluated two docetaxel-based regimens to see which would be most promising according to overall response rate (ORR) for comparison in a phase III trial with epirubicin-cisplatin-fluorouracil (ECF) as first-line advanced gastric cancer therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with measurable unresectable and/or metastatic gastric carcinoma, a performance status <or= 1, and adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function randomly received <or= eight 3-weekly cycles of ECF (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) on day 1, cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1, and fluorouracil [FU] 200 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 21), TC (docetaxel initially 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 [later reduced to 75 mg/m(2) as a result of toxicity] and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1), or TCF (TC plus FU 300 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 14). Study objectives included response (primary), survival, toxicity, and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: ORR was 25.0% (95% CI, 13% to 41%) for ECF, 18.5% (95% CI, 9% to 34%) for TC, and 36.6% (95% CI, 23% to 53%) for TCF (n = 119). Median overall survival times were 8.3, 11.0, and 10.4 months for ECF, TC, and TCF, respectively. Toxicity was acceptable, with one toxic death (TC arm). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurred in more treatment cycles with docetaxel (TC, 49%; TCF, 57%; ECF, 34%). Global health status/QOL substantially improved with ECF and remained similar to baseline with both docetaxel regimens. CONCLUSION: Time to response and ORR favor TCF over TC for further evaluation, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting. A trend towards increased myelosuppression and infectious complications with TCF versus TC or ECF was observed.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: In a previous randomised EORTC study on adjuvant dibromodulcitol (DBD) and bichloroethylnitrosourea (BCNU) in adults with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and anaplastic astrocytoma (AA), a clinically significant trend towards a longer overall survival (OS) and a progression-free survival (PFS) was observed in the subgroup of AA. The aim of the present study was to test this adjuvant regimen in a larger number of AA patients. METHODS: Continuation of the previous phase III trial for newly diagnosed AA according to the local pathologist. Patients were randomised to either radiotherapy only or to radiotherapy in combination with BCNU on day 2 and weekly DBD, followed by adjuvant DBD and BCNU in cycles of six weeks for a maximum total treatment duration of one year. OS was the primary end-point. RESULTS: Patients (193 ) with newly diagnosed AA according to local pathological assessment were randomised to radiotherapy (RT) alone (n=99), or to RT plus DBD/BCNU (n=94); 12 patients were considered not eligible. At central pathology review, over half (53%) of the locally diagnosed AA cases could not be confirmed. On intent-to-treat analysis, no statistically significant differences in OS (p=0.111) and PFS (p=0.087) were observed, median OS after RT was only 23.9 months 95% confidence interval (CI), [18.4-34.0] after RT plus DBD/BCNU 27.3 months 95% CI [21.4-46.8]. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant improvement in survival was observed after BCNU/DBD adjuvant chemotherapy in AA patients. The trend towards improved survival is consistent with previous reports. Central pathology review of grade 3 tumours remains crucial.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The management of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a comprehensive treatment strategy involving several lines of therapy, maintenance, salvage surgery, and treatment-free intervals. Besides chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan), molecular-targeted agents such as anti-angiogenic agents (bevacizumab, aflibercept, regorafenib) and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents (cetuximab, panitumumab) have become available. Ultimately, given the increasing cost of new active compounds, new strategy trials are needed to define the optimal use and the best sequencing of these agents. Such new clinical trials require alternative endpoints that can capture the effect of several treatment lines and be measured earlier than overall survival to help shorten the duration and reduce the size and cost of trials. METHODS/DESIGN: STRATEGIC-1 is an international, open-label, randomized, multicenter phase III trial designed to determine an optimally personalized treatment sequence of the available treatment modalities in patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC. Two standard treatment strategies are compared: first-line FOLFIRI-cetuximab, followed by oxaliplatin-based second-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab (Arm A) vs. first-line OPTIMOX-bevacizumab, followed by irinotecan-based second-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab, and by an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody with or without irinotecan as third-line treatment (Arm B). The primary endpoint is duration of disease control. A total of 500 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to one of the two treatment strategies. DISCUSSION: The STRATEGIC-1 trial is designed to give global information on the therapeutic sequences in patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC that in turn is likely to have a significant impact on the management of this patient population. The trial is open for inclusion since August 2013. TRIAL REGISTRATION: STRATEGIC-1 is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01910610, 23 July, 2013. STRATEGIC-1 is registered at EudraCT-No.: 2013-001928-19, 25 April, 2013.
Resumo:
The FIT trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan (0.4 mCi/kg; maximum dose 32 mCi) when used as consolidation of first complete or partial remission in patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients were randomly assigned to either 90Y-ibritumomab treatment (n = 207) or observation (n = 202) within 3 months (mo) of completing initial induction therapy (chemotherapy only: 86%; rituximab in combination with chemotherapy: 14%). Response status prior to randomization did not differ between the groups: 52% complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu) to induction therapy and 48% partial response (PR) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 53% CR/CRu and 44% PR in the control arm. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) of the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results from the first extended follow-up after a median of 3.5 years revealed a significant improvement in PFS from the time of randomization with 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation compared with control (36.5 vs 13.3 mo, respectively; P < 0.0001; Morschhauser et al. JCO. 2008; 26:5156-5164). Here we report a median follow-up of 66.2 mo (5.5 years). Five-year PFS was 47% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 29% in the control group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% CI 0.39-0.65; P < 0.0001). Median PFS in the 90Y-ibritumomab group was 49 mo vs 14 mo in the control group. In patients achieving a CR/CRu after induction, 5-year PFS was 57% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group, and the median had not yet been reached at 92 months, compared with a 43% 5-year PFS in the control group and a median of 31 mo (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.89). For patients in PR after induction, the 5-year PFS was 38% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group with a median PFS of 30 mo vs 14% in the control group with a median PFS of 6 mo (HR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.53). Patients who had received rituximab as part of induction treatment had a 5-year PFS of 64% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 48% in the control group (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.30-1.47). For all patients, time to next treatment (as calculated from the date of randomization) differed significantly between both groups; median not reached at 99 mo in the 90Y-ibritumomab group vs 35 mo in the control group (P < 0.0001). The majority of patients received rituximab-containing regimens when treated after progression (63/82 [77%] in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 102/122 [84%] in the control group). Overall response rate to second-line treatment was 79% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group (57% CR/CRu and 22% PR) vs 78% in the control arm (59% CR/CRu, 19% PR). Five-year overall survival was not significantly different between the groups; 93% and 89% in the 90Y-ibritumomab and control groups, respectively (P = 0.561). To date, 40 patients have died; 18 in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 22 in the control group. Secondary malignancies were diagnosed in 16 patients in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 9 patients in the control arm (P = 0.19). There were 6 (3%) cases of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)/acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 1 MDS in the control arm (P = 0.063). In conclusion, this extended follow-up of the FIT trial confirms the benefit of 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation with a nearly 3 year advantage in median PFS. A significant 5-year PFS improvement was confirmed for patients with a CR/CRu or a PR after induction. Effective rescue treatment with rituximab-containing regimens may explain the observed no difference in overall survival between both patient groups who were - for the greater part - rituximab-naïve.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: The phase III EORTC 22033-26033/NCIC CE5 intergroup trial compares 50.4 Gy radiotherapy with up-front temozolomide in previously untreated low-grade glioma. We describe the digital EORTC individual case review (ICR) performed to evaluate protocol radiotherapy (RT) compliance. METHODS: Fifty-eight institutions were asked to submit 1-2 randomly selected cases. Digital ICR datasets were uploaded to the EORTC server and accessed by three central reviewers. Twenty-seven parameters were analysed including volume delineation, treatment planning, organ at risk (OAR) dosimetry and verification. Consensus reviews were collated and summary statistics calculated. RESULTS: Fifty-seven of seventy-two requested datasets from forty-eight institutions were technically usable. 31/57 received a major deviation for at least one section. Relocation accuracy was according to protocol in 45. Just over 30% had acceptable target volumes. OAR contours were missing in an average of 25% of cases. Up to one-third of those present were incorrectly drawn while dosimetry was largely protocol compliant. Beam energy was acceptable in 97% and 48 patients had per protocol beam arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: Digital RT plan submission and review within the EORTC 22033-26033 ICR provide a solid foundation for future quality assurance procedures. Strict evaluation resulted in overall grades of minor and major deviation for 37% and 32%, respectively.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma, the most common adult primary malignant brain tumor, confers poor prognosis (median survival of 15 months) notwithstanding aggressive treatment. Combination chemotherapy including carmustine (BCNU) or temozolomide (TMZ) with the MGMT inhibitor O6-benzylguanine (O6BG) has been used, but has been associated with dose-limiting hematopoietic toxicity. OBJECTIVE: To assess safety and efficacy of a retroviral vector encoding the O6BG-resistant MGMTP140K gene for transduction and autologous transplantation of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) in MGMT unmethylated, newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients in an attempt to chemoprotect bone marrowduring combination O6BG/TMZ therapy. METHODS: Three patients have been enrolled in the first cohort. Patients underwent standard radiation therapy without TMZ followed by G-CSF mobilization, apheresis, and conditioning with 600 mg/m2 BCNU prior to infusion of gene-modified cells. Posttransplant, patients were treated with 28-day cycles of single doseTMZ (472 mg/m2) with 48-hour intravenous O6BG (120 mg/m2 bolus, then 30 mg/m2/d). RESULTS: The BCNU dose was nonmyeloablative with ANC ,500/mL for ≤3 d and nadir thrombocytopenia of 28,000/mL. Gene marking in pre-infusion colony forming units (CFUs) was 70.6%, 79.0%, and 74.0% in Patients 1, 2, and 3, respectively, by CFU-PCR. Following engraftment, gene marking in white blood cells and sorted granulocytes ranged between 0.37-0.84 and 0.33-0.83 provirus copies, respectively, by real-time PCR. Posttransplant gene marking in CFUs from CD34-selected cells ranged from 28.5% to 47.4%. Patients have received 4, 3, and 2 cycles of O6BG/TMZ, respectively, with evidence for selection of gene-modified cells. One patient has received a single dose-escalated cycle at 590 mg/m2 TMZ. No additional extra-hematopoietic toxicity has been observed thus far and all three patients exhibit stable disease at 7-8 months since diagnosis CONCLUSIONS: We believe that these data demonstrate the feasibility of achieving significant engraftment of MGMTP140K-modified cells with a well-tolerated dose of BCNU. Further follow-up will determine whether this approach will allow for further dose escalation of TMZ and improved survival.
Resumo:
The FIT trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan (0.4 mCi/kg; maximum dose 32 mCi) when used as consolidation of first complete or partial remission in patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients were randomly assigned to either 90Y-ibritumomab treatment (n = 207) or observation (n = 202) within 3 months (mo) of completing initial induction therapy (chemotherapy only: 86%; rituximab in combination with chemotherapy: 14%). Response status prior to randomization did not differ between the groups: 52% complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu) to induction therapy and 48% partial response (PR) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 53% CR/CRu and 44% PR in the control arm. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) of the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results from the first extended follow-up after a median of 3.5 years revealed a significant improvement in PFS from the time of randomization with 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation compared with control (36.5 vs 13.3 mo, respectively; P < 0.0001; Morschhauser et al. JCO. 2008; 26:5156-5164). Here we report a median follow-up of 66.2 mo (5.5 years). Five-year PFS was 47% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 29% in the control group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% CI 0.39-0.65; P < 0.0001). Median PFS in the 90Y-ibritumomab group was 49 mo vs 14 mo in the control group. In patients achieving a CR/CRu after induction, 5-year PFS was 57% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group, and the median had not yet been reached at 92 months, compared with a 43% 5-year PFS in the control group and a median of 31 mo (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.89). For patients in PR after induction, the 5-year PFS was 38% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group with a median PFS of 30 mo vs 14% in the control group with a median PFS of 6 mo (HR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.53). Patients who had received rituximab as part of induction treatment had a 5-year PFS of 64% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 48% in the control group (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.30-1.47). For all patients, time to next treatment (as calculated from the date of randomization) differed significantly between both groups; median not reached at 99 mo in the 90Y-ibritumomab group vs 35 mo in the control group (P < 0.0001). The majority of patients received rituximab-containing regimens when treated after progression (63/82 [77%] in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 102/122 [84%] in the control group). Overall response rate to second-line treatment was 79% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group (57% CR/CRu and 22% PR) vs 78% in the control arm (59% CR/CRu, 19% PR). Five-year overall survival was not significantly different between the groups; 93% and 89% in the 90Y-ibritumomab and control groups, respectively (P = 0.561). To date, 40 patients have died; 18 in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 22 in the control group. Secondary malignancies were diagnosed in 16 patients in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 9 patients in the control arm (P = 0.19). There were 6 (3%) cases of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)/acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 1 MDS in the control arm (P = 0.063). In conclusion, this extended follow-up of the FIT trial confirms the benefit of 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation with a nearly 3 year advantage in median PFS. A significant 5-year PFS improvement was confirmed for patients with a CR/CRu or a PR after induction. Effective rescue treatment with rituximab-containing regimens may explain the observed no difference in overall survival between both patient groups who were - for the greater part - rituximab-naïve.
Resumo:
Purpose : To establish the feasibility and tolerability of gefitinib (ZD1839, Iressa) with radiation (RT) or concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) with cisplatin (CDDP) in patients with advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and Methods : In this multicenter Phase I study, 5 patients with unresectable NSCLC received 250 mg gefitinib daily starting 1 week before RT at a dose of 63 Gy (Step 1). After a first safety analysis, 9 patients were treated daily with 250 mg gefitinib plus CRT in the form of RT and weekly CDDP 35 mg/m(2) (Step 2). Gefitinib was maintained for up to 2 years until disease progression or toxicity.Results : Fourteen patients were assessed in the two steps. In Step 1 (five patients were administered only gefitinib and RT), no lung toxicities were seen, and there was no dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Adverse events were skin and subcutaneous tissue reactions, limited to Grade 1-2. In Step 2, two of nine patients (22.2%) had DLT. One patient suffered from dyspnea and dehydration associated with neutropenic pneumonia, and another showed elevated liver enzymes. In both steps combined, 5 of 14 patients (35.7%) experienced one or more treatment interruptions.Conclusions : Gefitinib (250 mg daily) in combination with RT and CDDP in patients with Stage HI NSCLC is feasible, but CDDP likely enhances toxicity. The impact of gefitinib on survival and disease control as a first-line treatment in combination with RT remains to be determined. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc.
Resumo:
The choice of design between individual randomisation, cluster or pseudo-cluster randomisation is often made difficult. Clear methodological guidelines have been given for trials in general practice, but not for vaccine trials. This article proposes a decisional flow-chart to choose the most adapted design for evaluating the effectiveness of a vaccine in large-scale studies. Six criteria have been identified: importance of herd immunity or herd protection, ability to delimit epidemiological units, homogeneity of transmission probability across sub-populations, population's acceptability of randomisation, availability of logistical resources, and estimated sample size. This easy to use decisional method could help sponsors, trial steering committees and ethical committees adopt the most suitable design.