Prevention of preterm delivery with vaginal progesterone in women with preterm labour (4P): randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of 200 mg of daily vaginal natural progesterone to prevent preterm birth in women with preterm labour. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty-nine centres in Switzerland and Argentina. POPULATION: A total of 385 women with preterm labour (24(0/7) to 33(6/7)  weeks of gestation) treated with acute tocolysis. METHODS: Participants were randomly allocated to either 200 mg daily of self-administered vaginal progesterone or placebo within 48 hours of starting acute tocolysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was delivery before 37 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes were delivery before 32 and 34 weeks, adverse effects, duration of tocolysis, re-admissions for preterm labour, length of hospital stay, and neonatal morbidity and mortality. The study was ended prematurely based on results of the intermediate analysis. RESULTS: Preterm birth occurred in 42.5% of women in the progesterone group versus 35.5% in the placebo group (relative risk [RR] 1.2; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.93-1.5). Delivery at <32 and <34 weeks did not differ between the two groups (12.9 versus 9.7%; [RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.7-2.5] and 19.7 versus 12.9% [RR 1.5; 95% CI 0.9-2.4], respectively). The duration of tocolysis, hospitalisation, and recurrence of preterm labour were comparable between groups. Neonatal morbidity occurred in 44 (22.8%) cases on progesterone versus 35 (18.8%) cases on placebo (RR: 1.2; 95% CI 0.82-1.8), whereas there were 4 (2%) neonatal deaths in each study group. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence that the daily administration of 200 mg vaginal progesterone decreases preterm birth or improves neonatal outcome in women with preterm labour.

Oral Antibiotics for Fever in Low-Risk Neutropenic Patients With Cancer: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Multicenter Trial Comparing Single Daily Moxifloxacin With Twice Daily Ciprofloxacin Plus Amoxicillin/Clavulanic Acid Combination Therapy--EORTC Infectious Diseases Group Trial XV.

PURPOSE This double-blind, multicenter trial compared the efficacy and safety of a single daily oral dose of moxifloxacin with oral combination therapy in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Inclusion criteria were cancer, febrile neutropenia, low risk of complications as predicted by a Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score > 20, ability to swallow, and ≤ one single intravenous dose of empiric antibiotic therapy before study drug treatment initiation. Early discharge was encouraged when a set of predefined criteria was met. Patients received either moxifloxacin (400 mg once daily) monotherapy or oral ciprofloxacin (750 mg twice daily) plus amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (1,000 mg twice daily). The trial was designed to show equivalence of the two drug regimens in terms of therapy success, defined as defervescence and improvement in clinical status during study drug treatment (< 10% difference). Results Among the 333 patients evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis, therapy success was observed in 80% of the patients administered moxifloxacin and in 82% of the patients administered combination therapy (95% CI for the difference, -10% to 8%, consistent with equivalence). Minor differences in tolerability, safety, and reasons for failure were observed. More than 50% of the patients in the two arms were discharged on protocol therapy, with 5% readmissions among those in either arm. Survival was similar (99%) in both arms. CONCLUSION Monotherapy with once daily oral moxifloxacin is efficacious and safe in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients identified with the help of the MASCC scoring system, discharged early, and observed as outpatients.

A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of pioglitazone in combination with riluzole in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Pioglitazone, an oral anti-diabetic that stimulates the PPAR-gamma transcription factor, increased survival of mice with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We performed a phase II, double blind, multicentre, placebo controlled trial of pioglitazone in ALS patients under riluzole. 219 patients were randomly assigned to receive 45 mg/day of pioglitazone or placebo (one: one allocation ratio). The primary endpoint was survival. Secondary endpoints included incidence of non-invasive ventilation and tracheotomy, and slopes of ALS-FRS, slow vital capacity, and quality of life as assessed using EUROQoL EQ-5D. The study was conducted under a two-stage group sequential test, allowing to stop for futility or superiority after interim analysis. Shortly after interim analysis, 30 patients under pioglitazone and 24 patients under placebo had died. The trial was stopped for futility; the hazard ratio for primary endpoint was 1.21 (95% CI: 0.71-2.07, p = 0.48). Secondary endpoints were not modified by pioglitazone treatment. Pioglitazone was well tolerated. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Pioglitazone has no beneficial effects on the survival of ALS patients as add-on therapy to riluzole. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00690118.

A Phase IIB, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Immunogenicity Study of Vacc-4x Versus Placebo in HIV-1-infected Patients

Background: Vacc-4x is a peptide-based HIV therapeutic vaccine to conserved domains on p24Gag. Recently conserved 'sectors' on HIV p24, critical for virus viability and thereby immunologically vulnerable have been identified. Elite controllers target immune responses to such regions. The Vacc-4x peptides lie within a number of these conserved sectors of HIV p24. The co-primary endpoints of this study were to compare changes in CD4 counts and return to ART between treatmentand placebo groups during a 24 week treatment interruption. Secondary endpoints included safety, viral load and immunogenicity.Methods: This prospective, randomized, double blind phase IIB clinical study (NCT00659789) was carried out in 13 European and 5 US centers recruiting 135 patients on ART. After 6 immunizations on ART over 28 weeks, treatment was interrupted for up to 24 weeks (to week 52) (Vacc-4x n = 88; placebo n = 38). Immunological analyses (ELISPOT, proliferation, intracellular cytokine staining) were carried out at central laboratories.Results: There were no Vacc-4x-related serious adverse events. Of the 135 patients recruited (male n = 92; female n = 43), 126 patients completed the study. Median prestudy CD4 count was 712 (Vacc-4x) and 619 cells/mm3 (placebo), and median CD4 nadir 300 (Vacc-4x) and 285 cells/mm3 (placebo). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding change in CD4 counts (p = 0.12) or ART resumption (p = 0.89) during treatment interruption. A statistically significant treatment difference between Vacc-4x and placebo groupsfor viral load (VL) was found for patients who achieved a 6 month ART-free period (p = 0.0022). There was a positive correlation between ELISPOT responses and lower viral load in the Vacc-4x group compared to placebo (p = 0.02). Long-term follow-up of patients up t o week 104 was completed in June 2011.Conclusion: Vacc-4x was found to be safe and well tolerated. TheVacc-4x group experienced a significant reduction in viral load compared to placebo.

Afatinib versus placebo as adjuvant therapy after chemoradiation in a double-blind, phase III study (LUX-Head & Neck 2) in patients with primary unresected, clinically intermediate-to-high-risk head and neck cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Over 50% of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) present with locoregionally advanced disease. Those at intermediate-to-high risk of recurrence after definitive therapy exhibit advanced disease based on tumour size or lymph node involvement, non-oropharynx primary sites, human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative oropharyngeal cancer, or HPV-positive oropharynx cancer with smoking history (>10-pack-years). Non-surgical approaches include concurrent chemoradiotherapy, induction chemotherapy followed by definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, or radiotherapy alone. Following locoregional therapies (including surgical salvage of residual cervical nodes), no standard intervention exists. Overexpression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), an ErbB family member, is associated with poor prognosis in HNSCC. EGFR-targeted cetuximab is the only targeted therapy that impacts overall survival and is approved for HNSCC in the USA or Europe. However, resistance often occurs, and new approaches, such as targeting multiple ErbB family members, may be required. Afatinib, an irreversible ErbB family blocker, demonstrated antiproliferative activity in preclinical models and comparable clinical efficacy with cetuximab in a randomized phase II trial in recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. LUX-Head & Neck 2, a phase III study, will assess adjuvant afatinib versus placebo following chemoradiotherapy in primary unresected locoregionally advanced intermediate-to-high-risk HNSCC. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients with primary unresected locoregionally advanced HNSCC, in good clinical condition with unfavourable risk of recurrence, and no evidence of disease after chemoradiotherapy will be randomized 2:1 to oral once-daily afatinib (40 mg starting dose) or placebo. As HPV status will not be determined for eligibility, unfavourable risk is defined as non-oropharynx primary site or oropharynx cancer in patients with a smoking history (>10 pack-years). Treatment will continue for 18 months or until recurrence or unacceptable adverse events occur. The primary endpoint measure is duration of disease-free survival; secondary endpoint measures are disease-free survival rate at 2 years, overall survival, health-related quality of life and safety. DISCUSSION: Given the unmet need in the adjuvant treatment of intermediate-to-high-risk HNSCC patients, it is expected that LUX-Head & Neck 2 will provide new insights into treatment in this setting and might demonstrate the ability of afatinib to significantly improve disease-free survival, compared with placebo. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01345669.

Safety and efficacy of the peptide-based therapeutic vaccine for HIV-1, Vacc-4x: a phase 2 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Present combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) alone does not cure HIV infection and requires lifelong drug treatment. The potential role of HIV therapeutic vaccines as part of an HIV cure is under consideration. Our aim was to assess the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of Vacc-4x, a peptide-based HIV-1 therapeutic vaccine targeting conserved domains on p24(Gag), in adults infected with HIV-1. METHODS: Between July, 2008, and June, 2010, we did a multinational double-blind, randomised, phase 2 study comparing Vacc-4x with placebo. Participants were adults infected with HIV-1 who were aged 18-55 years and virologically suppressed on cART (viral load <50 copies per mL) with CD4 cell counts of 400 × 10(6) cells per L or greater. The trial was done at 18 sites in Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK, and the USA. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to Vacc-4x or placebo. Group allocation was masked from participants and investigators. Four primary immunisations, weekly for 4 weeks, containing Vacc-4x (or placebo) were given intradermally after administration of adjuvant. Booster immunisations were given at weeks 16 and 18. At week 28, cART was interrupted for up to 24 weeks. The coprimary endpoints were cART resumption and changes in CD4 counts during treatment interruption. Analyses were by modified intention to treat: all participants who received one intervention. Furthermore, safety, viral load, and immunogenicity (as measured by ELISPOT and proliferation assays) were assessed. The 52 week follow-up period was completed in June, 2011. For the coprimary endpoints the proportion of participants who met the criteria for cART resumption was analysed with a logistic regression model with the treatment effect being assessed in a model including country as a covariate. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00659789. FINDINGS: 174 individuals were screened; because of slow recruitment, enrolment stopped with 136 of a planned 345 participants and 93 were randomly assigned to receive Vacc-4x and 43 to receive placebo. There were no differences between the two groups for the primary efficacy endpoints in those participants who stopped cART at week 28. Of the participants who resumed cART, 30 (34%) were in the Vacc-4x group and 11 (29%) in the placebo group, and percentage changes in CD4 counts were not significant (mean treatment difference -5·71, 95% CI -13·01 to 1·59). However, a significant difference in viral load was noted for the Vacc-4x group both at week 48 (median 23 100 copies per mL Vacc-4x vs 71 800 copies per mL placebo; p=0·025) and week 52 (median 19 550 copies per mL vs 51 000 copies per mL; p=0·041). One serious adverse event, exacerbation of multiple sclerosis, was reported as possibly related to study treatment. Vacc-4x was immunogenic, inducing proliferative responses in both CD4 and CD8 T-cell populations. INTERPRETATION: The proportion of participants resuming cART before end of study and change in CD4 counts during the treatment interruption showed no benefit of vaccination. Vacc-4x was safe, well tolerated, immunogenic, seemed to contribute to a viral-load setpoint reduction after cART interruption, and might be worth consideration in future HIV-cure investigative strategies. FUNDING: Norwegian Research Council GLOBVAC Program and Bionor Pharma ASA.

Randomized double-blind controlled Phase I/IIa trial to assess the efficacy of malaria vaccine PfCS102 to protect against challenge with P. falciparum.

The aim of this Phase I/IIa double-blind controlled trial was to test the efficacy of the sporozoite-based malaria vaccine PfCS 282-383 (PfCS102) to protect against Plasmodium falciparum parasitaemia. 16 volunteers were randomized to receive twice 30 μg of PfCS102 formulated in Montanide ISA 720 or ISA 720 alone (control). Two weeks after 2nd immunization, volunteers were challenged using 5 infected mosquitoes. All vaccinees developed antibodies against PfCS102 versus none control. 8/8 vaccinees and 6/6 controls challenged developed malaria parasitaemia. The duration from infection to onset of patent parasitaemia was similar in both groups (214 h in vaccinees and 216 in controls). PfCS102 is safe and immunogenic but provides no protection against artificial challenge in its current formulation.

Canakinumab reduces the risk of acute gouty arthritis flares during initiation of allopurinol treatment: results of a double-blind, randomised study.

Objective This study assessed the efficacy and safety of canakinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin 1 beta monoclonal antibody, for prophylaxis against acute gouty arthritis flares in patients initiating urate-lowering treatment.Methods In this double-blind, double-dummy, dose-ranging study, 432 patients with gouty arthritis initiating allopurinol treatment were randomised 1:1:1:1:1:1:2 to receive: a single dose of canakinumab, 25, 50, 100, 200, or 300 mg subcutaneously; 4 x 4-weekly doses of canakinumab (50 + 50 + 25 + 25 mg subcutaneously); or daily colchicine 0.5 mg orally for 16 weeks. Patients recorded details of flares in diaries. The study aimed to determine the canakinumab dose having equivalent efficacy to colchicine 0.5 mg at 16 weeks.Results A dose-response for canakinumab was not apparent with any of the four predefined dose-response models. The estimated canakinumab dose with equivalent efficacy to colchicine was below the range of doses tested. At 16 weeks, there was a 62% to 72% reduction in the mean number of flares per patient for canakinumab doses >= 50 mg versus colchicine based on a negative binomial model (rate ratio: 0.28-0.38, p <= 0.0083), and the percentage of patients experiencing >= 1 flare was significantly lower for all canakinumab doses (15% to 27%) versus colchicine (44%, p<0.05). There was a 64% to 72% reduction in the risk of experiencing >= 1 flare for canakinumab doses >= 50 mg versus colchicine at 16 weeks (hazard ratio (HR): 0.28-0.36, p <= 0.05). The incidence of adverse events was similar across treatment groups.Conclusions Single canakinumab doses >= 50 mg or four 4-weekly doses provided superior prophylaxis against flares compared with daily colchicine 0.5 mg.

Cefuroxime prophylaxis is effective in noninstrumented spine surgery : a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Rapport de synthèse : Plusieurs investigateurs ont démontré que l'utilisation d'une antibiothérapie prophylactique lors d'interventions neurochirurgicales en terrain non infecté (chirurgie propre) réduisait le taux d'infection. Toutefois, ces taux d'infections sont très variables en fonction des types de chirurgie et de la durée des interventions. Les craniotomies, la mise en place ou le remplacement de shunt ventriculo-cardiaque, l'extirpation de méningiomes intracrâniens et les interventions d'une durée de plus de quatre heures sont grevées d'un taux d'infections post-opératoires plus élevé. Si une prophylaxie antibiotique est maintenant reconnue et utilisée dans ce type de chirurgie, il n'a jamais été démontré que cette pratique amène un bénéfice dans les cas de chirurgie pour hernie discale. Des études ont montré que de nombreux organismes potentiellement pathogènes pouvaient être collectés et cultivés à proximité voire dans le champ opératoire. Malgré ces observations, le taux d'infections post-opératoires reste peu important (entre 1-4% selon les centres). Il n'est actuellement pas possible de distinguer le rôle respectif d'une antibiothérapie prophylactique et des pratiques d'asepsie habituelles (y compris l'usage de solutions de rinçage antiseptiques) dans la faible incidence des infections post-opératoires en ce qui concerne la chirurgie des hernies discales. Lorsque des opérations de chirurgie dite «propre » sont grevées d'un taux de complications aussi bas, une prophylaxie antibiotique n'est généralement pas recommandée, en raison d'un rapport coût-bénéfice défavorable. Le but de cette étude est d'évaluer la nécessité d'une antibiothérapie prophylactique par une céphalosporine de seconde génération (cefuroxime 1,5 g intraveineuse) dans la prévention des infections post-opératoires au cours d'une chirurgie pour hernie discale. Il s'agit d'un essai clinique prospectif, contrôlé contre placebo en insu réciproque, à répartition aléatoire. L'étude a été conduite dans les services de neurochirurgie de l'Hôpital Universitaire de Genève et du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois de Lausanne. L'ensemble des patients admis dans ces deux services pour une opération de hernie discale et ayant donné leur consentement ont été inclus dans l'étude qui s'est déroulé sur une période de 6 ans. Mille trois cent soixante-neuf patients opérés pour une hernie discale ont été inclus dans cet essai et 132 patients ont été exclus de l'analyse pour diverses raisons. Au total 1'237 patients ont été analysés, respectivement 613 et 624 patients dans le groupe cefuroxime et le groupe placebo. Les patients des deux groupes présentaient des caractéristiques identiques. Nous n'avons objectivé aucun effet secondaire indésirable attribuable à la cefuroxime ou au placebo. Huit (1.3%) patients du groupe cefuroxime et 18 patients (2.8%) du groupe placebo ont développé une infection du site opératoire (P=0.073). Neuf des patients infectés dans le groupe placebo présentaient une infection profonde du site opératoire (spondylodiscite, abcès épidural) et aucun dans le groupe cefuroxime (P<0.01). Tous les patients avec infection profonde du site opératoire ont été traités par antibiothérapie par voie intraveineuse pour au moins 4 semaines et il a été procédé à une reprise chirurgicale chez deux patients. Ces résultats montrent qu'il faut traiter 69 patients avec une antibiothérapie prophylactique de cefuroxime pour prévenir une infection du site opératoire. En conclusion, l'administration d'une dose de cefuroxime 1.5 g intraveineuse comme prophylaxie lors d'opération de hernie discale, permet de réduire significativement le risque d'infection profonde du site opératoire.

Fulvestrant with or without selumetinib, a MEK 1/2 inhibitor, in breast cancer progressing after aromatase inhibitor therapy: A multicentre randomised placebo-controlled double-blind phase II trial, SAKK 21/08.

BACKGROUND: Second line endocrine therapy has limited antitumour activity. Fulvestrant inhibits and downregulates the oestrogen receptor. The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway is one of the major cascades involved in resistance to endocrine therapy. We assessed the efficacy and safety of fulvestrant with selumetinib, a MEK 1/2 inhibitor, in advanced stage breast cancer progressing after aromatase inhibitor (AI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomised phase II trial included postmenopausal patients with endocrine-sensitive breast cancer. They were ramdomised to fulvestrant combined with selumetinib or placebo. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) in the experimental arm. ClinicalTrials.gov Indentifier: NCT01160718. RESULTS: Following the planned interim efficacy analysis, recruitment was interrupted after the inclusion of 46 patients (23 in each arm), because the selumetinib-fulvestrant arm did not reach the pre-specified DCR. DCR was 23% (95% confidence interval (CI) 8-45%) in the selumetinib arm and 50% (95% CI 27-75%) in the placebo arm. Median progression-free survival was 3.7months (95% CI 1.9-5.8) in the selumetinib arm and 5.6months (95% CI 3.4-13.6) in the placebo arm. Median time to treatment failure was 5.1 (95% CI 2.3-6.7) and 5.6 (95% CI 3.4-10.2) months, respectively. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events observed in the selumetinib-fulvestrant arm were skin disorders, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, oedema, diarrhoea, mouth disorders and muscle disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of selumetinib to fulvestrant did not show improving patients' outcome and was poorly tolerated at the recommended monotherapy dose. Selumetinib may have deteriorated the efficacy of the endocrine therapy in some patients.