Internet-Based Brief Intervention to Prevent Unhealthy Alcohol Use among Young Men: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Alcohol use is one of the leading modifiable morbidity and mortality risk factors among young adults. 2 parallel-group randomized controlled trial with follow-up at 1 and 6 months. Internet based study in a general population sample of young men with low-risk drinking, recruited between June 2012 and February 2013. Intervention: Internet-based brief alcohol primary prevention intervention (IBI). The IBI aims at preventing an increase in alcohol use: it consists of normative feedback, feedback on consequences, calorific value alcohol, computed blood alcohol concentration, indication that the reported alcohol use is associated with no or limited risks for health. Intervention group participants received the IBI. Control group (CG) participants completed only an assessment. Alcohol use (number of drinks per week), binge drinking prevalence. Analyses were conducted in 2014-2015. Of 4365 men invited to participate, 1633 did so; 896 reported low-risk drinking and were randomized (IBI: n = 451; CG: n = 445). At baseline, 1 and 6 months, the mean (SD) number of drinks/week was 2.4(2.2), 2.3(2.6), 2.5(3.0) for IBI, and 2.4(2.3), 2.8(3.7), 2.7(3.9) for CG. Binge drinking, absent at baseline, was reported by 14.4% (IBI) and 19.0% (CG) at 1 month and by 13.3% (IBI) and 13.0% (CG) at 6 months. At 1 month, beneficial intervention effects were observed on the number of drinks/week (p = 0.05). No significant differences were observed at 6 months. We found protective short term effects of a primary prevention IBI. Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN55991918.

Incidence and consequence of major bleeding in primary percutaneous intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the era of radial access: an analysis of the international randomized Acute myocardial infarction Treated with primary angioplasty and intravenous enoxaparin Or unfractionated heparin to Lower ischemic and bleeding events at short- and Long-term follow-up trial.

AIMS: The aims of the study are to compare the outcome with and without major bleeding and to identify the independent correlates of major bleeding complications and mortality in patients described in the ATOLL study. METHODS: The ATOLL study included 910 patients randomly assigned to either 0.5 mg/kg intravenous enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin before primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Incidence of major bleeding and ischemic end points was assessed at 1 month, and mortality, at 1 and 6 months. Patients with and without major bleeding complication were compared. A multivariate model of bleeding complications at 1 month and mortality at 6 months was realized. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed. RESULTS: The most frequent bleeding site appears to be the gastrointestinal tract. Age >75 years, cardiac arrest, and the use of insulin or >1 heparin emerged as independent correlates of major bleeding at 1 month. Patients presenting with major bleeding had significantly higher rates of adverse ischemic complications. Mortality at 6 months was higher in bleeders. Major bleeding was found to be one of the independent correlates of 6-month mortality. The addition or mixing of several anticoagulant drugs was an independent factor of major bleeding despite the predominant use of radial access. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that major bleeding is independently associated with poor outcome, increasing ischemic events, and mortality in primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed mostly with radial access.

Olanzapine or chlorpromazine plus lithium in first episode psychotic mania: An 8-week randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment strategies for mental disorders may vary according to illness stage. However no data currently exist to guide treatment in first episode psychotic mania. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy profile of chlorpromazine and olanzapine, as add-on to lithium, in patients with a first episode of psychotic mania, expecting better safety profile and adherence to olanzapine but similar efficacy for both treatments. METHODS: Data from 83 patients were collected in an 8-week randomised controlled trial on clinical variables, side effects, vital signs, and weight. Analyses of treatment differences over time were based on intent-to-treat principles. Kaplan-Meier estimated survival curves were used to analyse time-to-event data and mixed effects models repeated measures analysis of variance were used to determine treatment group differences over time on safety and efficacy measures. RESULTS: Ethics committee approval to delay informed consent procedure until recovery from the acute episode allowed the inclusion of 83 patients highly representative of those treated in the public sector. Contrary to our hypotheses, safety profile of both medications was similar. A signal for higher rate (P=.032) and earlier occurrence (P=.043) of mania remission was observed in the olanzapine group which did not survive correction for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine and chlorpromazine have a similar safety profile in a uniquely representative cohort of patients with first episode psychotic mania. The possibility for a greater impact of olanzapine on manic symptoms leading to earlier remission of the episode needs exploration in a large sample.

Responding to Young People's Health Risks in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomised Trial of Training Clinicians in Screening and Motivational Interviewing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention implementing best practice guidelines recommending clinicians screen and counsel young people across multiple psychosocial risk factors, on clinicians' detection of health risks and patients' risk taking behaviour, compared to a didactic seminar on young people's health. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomised trial where volunteer general practices were stratified by postcode advantage or disadvantage score and billing type (private, free national health, community health centre), then randomised into either intervention or comparison arms using a computer generated random sequence. Three months post-intervention, patients were recruited from all practices post-consultation for a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview and followed up three and 12 months later. Researchers recruiting, consenting and interviewing patients and patients themselves were masked to allocation status; clinicians were not. SETTING: General practices in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: General practices with at least one interested clinician (general practitioner or nurse) and their 14-24 year old patients. INTERVENTION: This complex intervention was designed using evidence based practice in learning and change in clinician behaviour and general practice systems, and included best practice approaches to motivating change in adolescent risk taking behaviours. The intervention involved training clinicians (nine hours) in health risk screening, use of a screening tool and motivational interviewing; training all practice staff (receptionists and clinicians) in engaging youth; provision of feedback to clinicians of patients' risk data; and two practice visits to support new screening and referral resources. Comparison clinicians received one didactic educational seminar (three hours) on engaging youth and health risk screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were patient report of (1) clinician detection of at least one of six health risk behaviours (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, risks for sexually transmitted infection, STI, unplanned pregnancy, and road risks); and (2) change in one or more of the six health risk behaviours, at three months or at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of future visits, trust in the clinician after exit interview, clinician detection of emotional distress and fear and abuse in relationships, and emotional distress at three and 12 months. Patient acceptability of the screening tool was also described for the intervention arm. Analyses were adjusted for practice location and billing type, patients' sex, age, and recruitment method, and past health risks, where appropriate. An intention to treat analysis approach was used, which included multilevel multiple imputation for missing outcome data. RESULTS: 42 practices were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison arms. Two intervention practices withdrew post allocation, prior to training, leaving 19 intervention (53 clinicians, 377 patients) and 21 comparison (79 clinicians, 524 patients) practices. 69% of patients in both intervention (260) and comparison (360) arms completed the 12 month follow-up. Intervention clinicians discussed more health risks per patient (59.7%) than comparison clinicians (52.7%) and thus were more likely to detect a higher proportion of young people with at least one of the six health risk behaviours (38.4% vs 26.7%, risk difference [RD] 11.6%, Confidence Interval [CI] 2.93% to 20.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 1.1 to 2.5). Patients reported less illicit drug use (RD -6.0, CI -11 to -1.2; OR 0·52, CI 0·28 to 0·96), and less risk for STI (RD -5.4, CI -11 to 0.2; OR 0·66, CI 0·46 to 0·96) at three months in the intervention relative to the comparison arm, and for unplanned pregnancy at 12 months (RD -4.4; CI -8.7 to -0.1; OR 0·40, CI 0·20 to 0·80). No differences were detected between arms on other health risks. There were no differences on secondary outcomes, apart from a greater detection of abuse (OR 13.8, CI 1.71 to 111). There were no reports of harmful events and intervention arm youth had high acceptance of the screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: A complex intervention, compared to a simple educational seminar for practices, improved detection of health risk behaviours in young people. Impact on health outcomes was inconclusive. Technology enabling more efficient, systematic health-risk screening may allow providers to target counselling toward higher risk individuals. Further trials require more power to confirm health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16059206.

Ability of physicians to diagnose influenza and usefulness of a rapid influenza antigen test in febrile returning travelers: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Fever is a frequent cause of medical consultation among returning travelers. The objectives of this study were to assess whether physicians were able to identify patients with influenza and whether the use of an influenza rapid diagnostic test (iRDT) modified the clinical management of such patients. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial conducted at 2 different Swiss hospitals between December 2008 and November 2012. Inclusion criteria were 1) age ≥18 years, 2) documented fever of ≥38 °C or anamnestic fever + cough or sore throat within the last 4 days, 3) illness occurring within 14 days after returning from a trip abroad, 4) no definitive alternative diagnosis. Physicians were asked to estimate the likelihood of influenza on clinical grounds, and a single nasopharyngeal swab was taken. Thereafter patients were randomized into 2 groups: i) patients with iRDT (BD Directigen A + B) performed on the nasopharyngeal swab, ii) patients receiving usual care. A quantitative PCR to detect influenza was done on all nasopharyngeal swabs after the recruitment period. Clinical management was evaluated on the basis of cost of medical care, number of X-rays requested and prescription of anti-infective drugs. RESULTS: 100 eligible patients were referred to the investigators. 93 patients had a naso-pharyngeal swab for a PCR and 28 (30%) swabs were positive for influenza. The median probability of influenza estimated by the physician was 70% for the PCR positive cases and 30% for the PCR negative cases (p < 0.001). The sensitivity of the iRDT was only 20%, and specificity 100%. Mean medical cost for the patients managed with iRDT and without iRDT were USD 581 (95%CI 454-707) and USD 661 (95%CI 522-800) respectively. 14/60 (23%) of the patients managed with iRDT were prescribed antibiotics versus 13/33 (39%) in the control group (p = 0.15). No patient received antiviral treatment. CONCLUSION: Influenza was a frequent cause of fever among these febrile returning travelers. Based on their clinical assessment, physicians had a higher level of suspicion for influenza in PCR positive cases. The iRDT used in this study showed a disappointingly low sensitivity and can therefore not be recommended for the management of these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00821626.

Severity and burden of partial-onset seizures in a phase III trial of eslicarbazepine acetate.

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.

Maintenance Therapy With Tumor-Treating Fields Plus Temozolomide vs Temozolomide Alone for Glioblastoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Glioblastoma is the most devastating primary malignancy of the central nervous system in adults. Most patients die within 1 to 2 years of diagnosis. Tumor-treating fields (TTFields) are a locoregionally delivered antimitotic treatment that interferes with cell division and organelle assembly. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of TTFields used in combination with temozolomide maintenance treatment after chemoradiation therapy for patients with glioblastoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: After completion of chemoradiotherapy, patients with glioblastoma were randomized (2:1) to receive maintenance treatment with either TTFields plus temozolomide (n = 466) or temozolomide alone (n = 229) (median time from diagnosis to randomization, 3.8 months in both groups). The study enrolled 695 of the planned 700 patients between July 2009 and November 2014 at 83 centers in the United States, Canada, Europe, Israel, and South Korea. The trial was terminated based on the results of this planned interim analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with TTFields was delivered continuously (>18 hours/day) via 4 transducer arrays placed on the shaved scalp and connected to a portable medical device. Temozolomide (150-200 mg/m2/d) was given for 5 days of each 28-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat population (significance threshold of .01) with overall survival in the per-protocol population (n = 280) as a powered secondary end point (significance threshold of .006). This prespecified interim analysis was to be conducted on the first 315 patients after at least 18 months of follow-up. RESULTS: The interim analysis included 210 patients randomized to TTFields plus temozolomide and 105 randomized to temozolomide alone, and was conducted at a median follow-up of 38 months (range, 18-60 months). Median progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat population was 7.1 months (95% CI, 5.9-8.2 months) in the TTFields plus temozolomide group and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.3-5.2 months) in the temozolomide alone group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [98.7% CI, 0.43-0.89]; P = .001). Median overall survival in the per-protocol population was 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.7-25.0 months) in the TTFields plus temozolomide group (n = 196) and 15.6 months (95% CI, 13.3-19.1 months) in the temozolomide alone group (n = 84) (HR, 0.64 [99.4% CI, 0.42-0.98]; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this interim analysis of 315 patients with glioblastoma who had completed standard chemoradiation therapy, adding TTFields to maintenance temozolomide chemotherapy significantly prolonged progression-free and overall survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00916409.

Safety of human immunisation with a live-attenuated Mycobacterium tuberculosis vaccine: a randomised, double-blind, controlled phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis remains one of the world's deadliest transmissible diseases despite widespread use of the BCG vaccine. MTBVAC is a new live tuberculosis vaccine based on genetically attenuated Mycobacterium tuberculosis that expresses most antigens present in human isolates of M tuberculosis. We aimed to compare the safety of MTBVAC with BCG in healthy adult volunteers. METHODS: We did this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, controlled phase 1 study at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV; Lausanne, Switzerland). Volunteers were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 18-45 years, clinically healthy, HIV-negative and tuberculosis-negative, and had no history of active tuberculosis, chemoprophylaxis for tuberculosis, or BCG vaccination. Volunteers fulfilling the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to three cohorts in a dose-escalation manner. Randomisation was done centrally by the CHUV Pharmacy and treatments were masked from the study team and volunteers. As participants were recruited within each cohort, they were randomly assigned 3:1 to receive MTBVAC or BCG. Of the participants allocated MTBVAC, those in the first cohort received 5 × 10(3) colony forming units (CFU) MTBVAC, those in the second cohort received 5 × 10(4) CFU MTBVAC, and those in the third cohort received 5 × 10(5) CFU MTBVAC. In all cohorts, participants assigned to receive BCG were given 5 × 10(5) CFU BCG. Each participant received a single intradermal injection of their assigned vaccine in 0·1 mL sterile water in their non-dominant arm. The primary outcome was safety in all vaccinated participants. Secondary outcomes included whole blood cell-mediated immune response to live MTBVAC and BCG, and interferon γ release assays (IGRA) of peripheral blood mononuclear cells. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02013245. FINDINGS: Between Jan 23, 2013, and Nov 6, 2013, we enrolled 36 volunteers into three cohorts, each of which consisted of nine participants who received MTBVAC and three who received BCG. 34 volunteers completed the trial. The safety of vaccination with MTBVAC at all doses was similar to that of BCG, and vaccination did not induce any serious adverse events. All individuals were IGRA negative at the end of follow-up (day 210). After whole blood stimulation with live MTBVAC or BCG, MTBVAC was at least as immunogenic as BCG. At the same dose as BCG (5×10(5) CFU), although no statistical significance could be achieved, there were more responders in the MTBVAC group than in the BCG group, with a greater frequency of polyfunctional CD4+ central memory T cells. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, MTBVAC is the first live-attenuated M tuberculosis vaccine to reach clinical assessment, showing similar safety to BCG. MTBVAC seemed to be at least as immunogenic as BCG, but the study was not powered to investigate this outcome. Further plans to use more immunogenicity endpoints in a larger number of volunteers (adults and adolescents) are underway, with the aim to thoroughly characterise and potentially distinguish immunogenicity between MTBVAC and BCG in tuberculosis-endemic countries. Combined with an excellent safety profile, these data support advanced clinical development in high-burden tuberculosis endemic countries. FUNDING: Biofabri and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through the TuBerculosis Vaccine Initiative (TBVI).

Effect of oral nitrate supplementation on pulmonary hemodynamics during exercise and time trial performance in normoxia and hypoxia: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypoxia-induced pulmonary vasoconstriction increases pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP) and may impede right heart function and exercise performance. This study examined the effects of oral nitrate supplementation on right heart function and performance during exercise in normoxia and hypoxia. We tested the hypothesis that nitrate supplementation would attenuate the increase in PAP at rest and during exercise in hypoxia, thereby improving exercise performance. METHODS: Twelve trained male cyclists [age: 31 ± 7 year (mean ± SD)] performed 15 km time-trial cycling (TT) and steady-state submaximal cycling (50, 100, and 150 W) in normoxia and hypoxia (11% inspired O2) following 3-day oral supplementation with either placebo or sodium nitrate (0.1 mmol/kg/day). We measured TT time-to-completion, muscle tissue oxygenation during TT and systolic right ventricle to right atrium pressure gradient (RV-RA gradient: index of PAP) during steady state cycling. RESULTS: During steady state exercise, hypoxia elevated RV-RA gradient (p > 0.05), while oral nitrate supplementation did not alter RV-RA gradient (p > 0.05). During 15 km TT, hypoxia lowered muscle tissue oxygenation (p < 0.05). Nitrate supplementation further decreased muscle tissue oxygenation during 15 km TT in hypoxia (p < 0.05). Hypoxia impaired time-to-completion during TT (p < 0.05), while no improvements were observed with nitrate supplementation in normoxia or hypoxia (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that oral nitrate supplementation does not attenuate acute hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction nor improve performance during time trial cycling in normoxia and hypoxia.

Prospective evaluation of circulating VEGF in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with bevacizumab, pemetrexed and cisplatin in the trial SAKK19/09.

Aim: Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The previous phase II trial ABIGAIL (Reck, 2010) suggested circulating VEGF as a prognostic, but not predictive, biomarker for patients (pts) with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with bevacizumab. We prospectively measured VEGF in the multicenter phase II trial SAKK19/09 (NCT01116219). Methods: SAKK19/09 enrolled 77 evaluable patients (pts) with previously untreated, advanced nonsquamous NSCLC and EGFR wild type. Pts received 4 cycles of cisplatin 75mg/m2 (or carboplatin AUC5), pemetrexed 500mg/m2 and bevacizumab 7.5mg/kg, followed by maintenance therapy with pemetrexed and bevacizumab until progression by RECIST1.1. Follow-up CT scans were performed every 6 weeks until week 54 and every 12 weeks thereafter. Baseline EDTA blood samples were sent by same-day courier to the central laboratory for centrifugation, aliquoting, and freezing. Upon completion of enrollment, aliquots were thawed, and VEGF quantification was performed centrally using Luminex® Performance Assay Human Base Kit A (R&D Systems, Abingdon, UK). The mean value was used to stratify pts into two groups (low versus high VEGF). Best response rate assessed by RECIST1.1 (CR + PR versus SD + PD). Results: Clinical results of the SAKK19/09 trial were reported previously (Gautschi, 2013). Baseline plasma VEGF was detectable in 71 of 77 (92%) evaluable patients treated with chemotherapy and bevacizumab. The mean value was 74.9 pg/ml, the median 47.5 pg/ml, and the range 3.55 to 310 pg/ml. Using the mean as a predefined cutoff value, 50 patients had low VEGF levels and 21 patients had high VEGF levels. High VEGF was significantly associated with shorter PFS (4.1 vs 8.3 months, HR = 2.56; 95%CI: 1.43- 4.57; p = 0.0015) and OS (8.7 vs 17.5 months, HR = 2.67; 95% CI: 1.37-5.20; p = 0.0041), but not with best response rate ( p = 0.2256). Conclusions: Consistent with the ABIGAIL trial, circulating VEGF was prognostic, but not predictive for response, in the current trial. Further work is ongoing to identify potentially predictive biomarkers for bevacizumab, using comprehensive proteomic analyses. Disclosure: S.I. Rothschild: I received honoraria for the participation in advisory boards from Eli Lilly and Roche and for presentations at scientific symposiums sponsored by Roche; O. Gautschi: Honoraria for advisory boards of Eli Lilly and Roche; R. Cathomas: Advisory board member: Eli Lilly. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) with or without hemithoracic radiotherapy: final results of the randomized multicenter phase II trial SAKK17/04.

Aim: We have previously documented the feasibility of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and EPP in a multicenter trial of MPM (Weder, Ann Oncol 18: 1196, 2007). The objectives of the trimodality trial SAKK17/04 (NCT00334594) were to evaluate the time to loco-regional relapse with or without high dose hemithoracic radiotherapy in a prospective multicenter randomized phase II trial in patients with R0 and R1 resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and EPP. Methods: Eligible patients had pathologically confirmed MPM, surgically resectable TNM stage (T1-3 N0-2 M0), PS0-1, ages 18-70 years. Part 1 had a phase II design, and included neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 3 cycles of cisplatin and pemetrexed, followed by restaging and EPP. The primary endpoint of part 1 was complete macroscopic resection (R0-1). Part 2 randomized consenting patients with R0-1 resection into two parallel phase II arms (control arm A and radiotherapy arm B). The primary endpoint for part 2 was loco-regional relapse-free survival (RFS). To detect a 1 year increase with 80% power and 10% alpha, 37 patients were needed for arm B. Secondary endpoints included operability, tolerability of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, survival, and translational research Results: Because accrual of part 2 was slower than planned, the trial was stopped in 2013. Overall, 153 patients entered the trial, of whom 125 underwent surgery and 99 had a complete macroscopic resection (primary endpoint part 1). Of the later patients, 54 could be randomized 1:1 into each arm. Reasons for non-randomization included patient refusal in 24 and ineligibility or protocol deviations in 21. Of the 27 patients randomized to hemithoracic radiotherapy, 25 completed the treatment as planned. For part 1 the median RFS was 8.8 (95%CI: 7.3-10.7) and median OS was 15.0 (95% CI: 12.1-19.3) months. For part 2 the median local RFS for group A was 7.6 (95%CI: 5.5-10.7) and for group B 9.4 (95%CI: 6.5-11.9) months (primary endpoint part 2), while the overall RFS and OS for group A were 5.7 (95%CI: 3.5-8.8) and 16.9 (95%CI: 10.7-23.6) months and for group B 7.6 (95% CI:5.2-10.6) and 14.9 (95%CI: 7.0-17.6) months. Conclusions: This study did not reach the primary endpoint which was defined as one-year increase in loco-regional relapse-free survival and thus does not support the routine use of hemithoracic RT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and EPP. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial of Preemptive Antifungal Therapy for the Prevention of Invasive Candidiasis Following Gastrointestinal Surgery for Intra-abdominal Infections.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing emergency gastrointestinal surgery for intra-abdominal infection are at risk of invasive candidiasis (IC) and candidates for preemptive antifungal therapy. METHODS: This exploratory, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessed a preemptive antifungal approach with micafungin (100 mg/d) in intensive care unit patients requiring surgery for intra-abdominal infection. Coprimary efficacy variables were the incidence of IC and the time from baseline to first IC in the full analysis set; an independent data review board confirmed IC. An exploratory biomarker analysis was performed using logistic regression. RESULTS: The full analysis set comprised 124 placebo- and 117 micafungin-treated patients. The incidence of IC was 8.9% for placebo and 11.1% for micafungin (difference, 2.24%; [95% confidence interval, -5.52 to 10.20]). There was no difference between the arms in median time to IC. The estimated odds ratio showed that patients with a positive (1,3)-β-d-glucan (ßDG) result were 3.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-13.29) times more likely to have confirmed IC than those with a negative result. CONCLUSIONS: This study was unable to provide evidence that preemptive administration of an echinocandin was effective in preventing IC in high-risk surgical intensive care unit patients with intra-abdominal infections. This may have been because the drug was administered too late to prevent IC coupled with an overall low number of IC events. It does provide some support for using ßDG to identify patients at high risk of IC. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01122368.

Final results of the SAKK 16/00 trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation to chemotherapy alone in stage IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

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.