Participation in a population-based physical activity programme as an aid for smoking cessation: a randomised trial.

OBJECTIVES: Exercise combined with nicotine therapy may help smoking cessation and minimise weight gain after quitting. Low participation in vigorous-intensity physical activity programmes precludes their population-wide applicability. In a randomised controlled trial, we tested whether a population-based moderate-intensity physical activity programme increases quit rates among sedentary smokers receiving nicotine therapy. METHODS: Participants (n=481; 57% male; mean age, 42.2 years (SD 10.1); mean cigarette consumption, 27 (SD 10.2) per day) were offered a nine-week smoking cessation programme consisting of a weekly 15-minute counselling session and the prescription of nicotine replacement therapy. In addition, participants in the physical activity group (n=229) also took part in a programme of moderate-intensity physical activity implemented at the national level, and offering nine weekly 60-minute sessions of physical activity. To ensure equal contact conditions, participants in the control group (n=252) attended weekly 60-minute health behaviour education sessions unrelated to physical activity. The primary outcome was continuous CO-verified smoking abstinence rates at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Continuous smoking abstinence rates were high and similar in the physical activity group and the control group at the end of the intervention (47% versus 46%, p=0.81) and at 1-year follow-up (27% versus 29%, p=0.71). The mean weight gain after one year was 4.4 kg and 6.2 kg among sustained quitters of the physical activity and control groups, respectively (p=0.06). CONCLUSION: Participation in a population-based moderate-intensity physical activity programme for 9 weeks in addition to a comprehensive smoking cessation programme did not significantly increase smoking cessation rates. A non-significant reduction in weight gain was observed among participants who quit smoking in the physical activity group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; US National Institutes for Health (available online at http://clinicaltrials.gov/; CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00521391).

Designing phase III or IV trials for vaccines: choosing between individual or cluster randomised trial designs.

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.

Concomitant chemoradiotherapy versus acceleration of radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy in locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (GORTEC 99-02): an open-label phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant chemoradiotherapy and accelerated radiotherapy independently improve outcomes for patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a combination of these approaches. METHODS: In our open-label phase 3 randomised trial, we enrolled patients with locally advanced, stage III and IV (non-metastatic) HNSCC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. We randomly allocated patients centrally with a computer program (with centre, T stage, N stage, and localisation as minimisation factors) in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive conventional chemoradiotherapy (70 Gy in 7 weeks plus three cycles of 4 days' concomitant carboplatin-fluorouracil), accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy (70 Gy in 6 weeks plus two cycles of 5 days' concomitant carboplatin-fluorouracil), or very accelerated radiotherapy alone (64·8 Gy [1·8 Gy twice daily] in 3·5 weeks). The primary endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS), was assessed in all enrolled patients. This trial is completed. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00828386. FINDINGS: Between Feb 29, 2000, and May 9, 2007, we randomly allocated 279 patients to receive conventional chemoradiotherapy, 280 to accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy, and 281 to very accelerated radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 5·2 years (IQR 4·9-6·2); rates of chemotherapy and radiotherapy compliance were good in all groups. Accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy offered no PFS benefit compared with conventional chemoradiotherapy (HR 1·02, 95% CI 0·84-1·23; p=0·88) or very accelerated radiotherapy (0·83, 0·69-1·01; p=0·060); conventional chemoradiotherapy improved PFS compared with very accelerated radiotherapy (0·82, 0·67-0·99; p=0·041). 3-year PFS was 37·6% (95% CI 32·1-43·4) after conventional chemoradiotherapy, 34·1% (28·7-39·8) after accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy, and 32·2% (27·0-37·9) after very accelerated radiotherapy. More patients in the very accelerated radiotherapy group had RTOG grade 3-4 acute mucosal toxicity (226 [84%] of 268 patients) compared with accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy (205 [76%] of 271 patients) or conventional chemoradiotherapy (180 [69%] of 262; p=0·0001). 158 (60%) of 265 patients in the conventional chemoradiotherapy group, 176 (64%) of 276 patients in the accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy group, and 190 (70%) of 272 patients in the very accelerated radiotherapy group were intubated with feeding tubes during treatment (p=0·045). INTERPRETATION: Chemotherapy has a substantial treatment effect given concomitantly with radiotherapy and acceleration of radiotherapy cannot compensate for the absence of chemotherapy. We noted the most favourable outcomes for conventional chemoradiotherapy, suggesting that acceleration of radiotherapy is probably not beneficial in concomitant chemoradiotherapy schedules. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health.

Randomised trial of oral versus sequential intravenous/oral cephalosporins in children with pyelonephritis.

The hypothesis was tested that oral antibiotic treatment in children with acute pyelonephritis and scintigraphy-documented lesions is equally as efficacious as sequential intravenous/oral therapy with respect to the incidence of renal scarring. A randomised multi-centre trial was conducted in 365 children aged 6 months to 16 years with bacterial growth in cultures from urine collected by catheter. The children were assigned to receive either oral ceftibuten (9 mg/kg once daily) for 14 days or intravenous ceftriaxone (50 mg/kg once daily) for 3 days followed by oral ceftibuten for 11 days. Only patients with lesions detected on acute-phase dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) scintigraphy underwent follow-up scintigraphy. Efficacy was evaluated by the rate of renal scarring after 6 months on follow-up scintigraphy. Of 219 children with lesions on acute-phase scintigraphy, 152 completed the study; 80 (72 females, median age 2.2 years) were given ceftibuten and 72 (62 females, median age 1.6 years) were given ceftriaxone/ceftibuten. Patients in the intravenous/oral group had significantly higher C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations at baseline and larger lesion(s) on acute-phase scintigraphy. Follow-up scintigraphy showed renal scarring in 21/80 children treated with ceftibuten and 33/72 with ceftriaxone/ceftibuten (p = 0.01). However, after adjustment for the confounding variables (CRP and size of acute-phase lesion), no significant difference was observed for renal scarring between the two groups (p = 0.2). Renal scarring correlated with the extent of the acute-phase lesion (r = 0.60, p < 0.0001) and the grade of vesico-ureteric reflux (r = 0.31, p = 0.03), and was more frequent in refluxing renal units (p = 0.04). The majority of patients, i.e. 44 in the oral group and 47 in the intravenous/oral group, were managed as out-patients. Side effects were not observed. From this study, we can conclude that once-daily oral ceftibuten for 14 days yielded comparable results to sequential ceftriaxone/ceftibuten treatment in children aged 6 months to 16 years with DMSA-documented acute pyelonephritis and it allowed out-patient management in the majority of these children.

Effect of interleukin-6 receptor inhibition with tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (OPTION study): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin 6 is involved in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis via its broad effects on immune and inflammatory responses. Our aim was to assess the therapeutic effects of blocking interleukin 6 by inhibition of the interleukin-6 receptor with tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel group phase III study, 623 patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis were randomly assigned with an interactive voice response system, stratified by site with a randomisation list provided by the study sponsor, to receive tocilizumab 8 mg/kg (n=205), tocilizumab 4 mg/kg (214), or placebo (204) intravenously every 4 weeks, with methotrexate at stable pre-study doses (10-25 mg/week). Rescue therapy with tocilizumab 8 mg/kg was offered at week 16 to patients with less than 20% improvement in both swollen and tender joint counts. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with 20% improvement in signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20 response) at week 24. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00106548. FINDINGS: The intention-to-treat analysis population consisted of 622 patients: one patient in the 4 mg/kg group did not receive study treatment and was thus excluded. At 24 weeks, ACR20 responses were seen in more patients receiving tocilizumab than in those receiving placebo (120 [59%] patients in the 8 mg/kg group, 102 [48%] in the 4 mg/kg group, 54 [26%] in the placebo group; odds ratio 4.0 [95% CI 2.6-6.1], p<0.0001 for 8 mg/kg vs placebo; and 2.6 [1.7-3.9], p<0.0001 for 4 mg/kg vs placebo). More people receiving tocilizumab than those receiving placebo had at least one adverse event (143 [69%] in the 8 mg/kg group; 151 [71%] in the 4 mg/kg group; 129 [63%] in the placebo group). The most common serious adverse events were serious infections or infestations, reported by six patients in the 8 mg/kg group, three in the 4 mg/kg group, and two in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Tocilizumab could be an effective therapeutic approach in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche, Chugai Pharmaceutical.

Effect of white-matter lesions on the risk of periprocedural stroke after carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy in the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS): a prespecified analysis of data from a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Findings from randomised trials have shown a higher early risk of stroke after carotid artery stenting than after carotid endarterectomy. We assessed whether white-matter lesions affect the perioperative risk of stroke in patients treated with carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis included in the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) were randomly allocated to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Copies of baseline brain imaging were analysed by two investigators, who were masked to treatment, for the severity of white-matter lesions using the age-related white-matter changes (ARWMC) score. Randomisation was done with a computer-generated sequence (1:1). Patients were divided into two groups using the median ARWMC. We analysed the risk of stroke within 30 days of revascularisation using a per-protocol analysis. ICSS is registered with controlled-trials.com, number ISRCTN 25337470. FINDINGS: 1036 patients (536 randomly allocated to carotid artery stenting, 500 to carotid endarterectomy) had baseline imaging available. Median ARWMC score was 7, and patients were dichotomised into those with a score of 7 or more and those with a score of less than 7. In patients treated with carotid artery stenting, those with an ARWMC score of 7 or more had an increased risk of stroke compared with those with a score of less than 7 (HR for any stroke 2·76, 95% CI 1·17-6·51; p=0·021; HR for non-disabling stroke 3·00, 1·10-8·36; p=0·031), but we did not see a similar association in patients treated with carotid endarterectomy (HR for any stroke 1·18, 0·40-3·55; p=0·76; HR for disabling or fatal stroke 1·41, 0·38-5·26; p=0·607). Carotid artery stenting was associated with a higher risk of stroke compared with carotid endarterectomy in patients with an ARWMC score of 7 or more (HR for any stroke 2·98, 1·29-6·93; p=0·011; HR for non-disabling stroke 6·34, 1·45-27·71; p=0·014), but there was no risk difference in patients with an ARWMC score of less than 7. INTERPRETATION: The presence of white-matter lesions on brain imaging should be taken into account when selecting patients for carotid revascularisation. Carotid artery stenting should be avoided in patients with more extensive white-matter lesions, but might be an acceptable alternative to carotid endarterectomy in patients with less extensive lesions. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, the Stroke Association, Sanofi-Synthélabo, the European Union Research Framework Programme 5.

Concurrent or sequential adjuvant letrozole and radiotherapy after conservative surgery for early-stage breast cancer (CO-HO-RT): a phase 2 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Letrozole radiosensitises breast cancer cells in vitro. In clinical settings, no data exist for the combination of letrozole and radiotherapy. We assessed concurrent and sequential radiotherapy and letrozole in the adjuvant setting. METHODS: This phase 2 randomised trial was undertaken in two centres in France and one in Switzerland between Jan 12, 2005, and Feb 21, 2007. 150 postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer were randomly assigned after conserving surgery to either concurrent radiotherapy and letrozole (n=75) or sequential radiotherapy and letrozole (n=75). Randomisation was open label with a minimisation technique, stratified by investigational centres, chemotherapy (yes vs no), radiation boost (yes vs no), and value of radiation-induced lymphocyte apoptosis (< or = 16% vs >16%). Whole breast was irradiated to a total dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks. In the case of supraclavicular and internal mammary node irradiation, the dose was 44-50 Gy. Letrozole was administered orally once daily at a dose of 2.5 mg for 5 years (beginning 3 weeks pre-radiotherapy in the concomitant group, and 3 weeks post-radiotherapy in the sequential group). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of acute (during and within 6 weeks of radiotherapy) and late (within 2 years) radiation-induced grade 2 or worse toxic effects of the skin. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00208273. FINDINGS: All patients were analysed apart from one in the concurrent group who withdrew consent before any treatment. During radiotherapy and within the first 12 weeks after radiotherapy, 31 patients in the concurrent group and 31 in the sequential group had any grade 2 or worse skin-related toxicity. The most common skin-related adverse event was dermatitis: four patients in the concurrent group and six in the sequential group had grade 3 acute skin dermatitis during radiotherapy. At a median follow-up of 26 months (range 3-40), two patients in each group had grade 2 or worse late effects (both radiation-induced subcutaneous fibrosis). INTERPRETATION: Letrozole can be safely delivered shortly after surgery and concomitantly with radiotherapy. Long-term follow-up is needed to investigate cardiac side-effects and cancer-specific outcomes. FUNDING: Novartis Oncology France.

Induction chemoradiation in stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: One of the standard options in the treatment of stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer is neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery. We did a randomised trial to investigate whether the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy improves outcomes. METHODS: We enrolled patients in 23 centres in Switzerland, Germany and Serbia. Eligible patients had pathologically proven, stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer and were randomly assigned to treatment groups in a 1:1 ratio. Those in the chemoradiotherapy group received three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (100 mg/m(2) cisplatin and 85 mg/m(2) docetaxel) followed by radiotherapy with 44 Gy in 22 fractions over 3 weeks, and those in the control group received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. All patients were scheduled to undergo surgery. Randomisation was stratified by centre, mediastinal bulk (less than 5 cm vs 5 cm or more), and weight loss (5% or more vs less than 5% in the previous 6 months). The primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00030771. FINDINGS: From 2001 to 2012, 232 patients were enrolled, of whom 117 were allocated to the chemoradiotherapy group and 115 to the chemotherapy group. Median event-free survival was similar in the two groups at 12·8 months (95% CI 9·7-22·9) in the chemoradiotherapy group and 11·6 months (8·4-15·2) in the chemotherapy group (p=0·67). Median overall survival was 37·1 months (95% CI 22·6-50·0) with radiotherapy, compared with 26·2 months (19·9-52·1) in the control group. Chemotherapy-related toxic effects were reported in most patients, but 91% of patients completed three cycles of chemotherapy. Radiotherapy-induced grade 3 dysphagia was seen in seven (7%) patients. Three patients died in the control group within 30 days after surgery. INTERPRETATION: Radiotherapy did not add any benefit to induction chemotherapy followed by surgery. We suggest that one definitive local treatment modality combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy is adequate to treat resectable stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), Swiss Cancer League, and Sanofi.

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.

Chest physiotherapy using passive expiratory techniques does not reduce bronchiolitis severity: a randomised controlled trial.

Chest physiotherapy (CP) using passive expiratory manoeuvres is widely used in Western Europe for the treatment of bronchiolitis, despite lacking evidence for its efficacy. We undertook an open randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of CP in infants hospitalised for bronchiolitis by comparing the time to clinical stability, the daily improvement of a severity score and the occurrence of complications between patients with and without CP. Children <1 year admitted for bronchiolitis in a tertiary hospital during two consecutive respiratory syncytial virus seasons were randomised to group 1 with CP (prolonged slow expiratory technique, slow accelerated expiratory flow, rarely induced cough) or group 2 without CP. All children received standard care (rhinopharyngeal suctioning, minimal handling, oxygen for saturation ≥92%, fractionated meals). Ninety-nine eligible children (mean age, 3.9 months), 50 in group 1 and 49 in group 2, with similar baseline variables and clinical severity at admission. Time to clinical stability, assessed as primary outcome, was similar for both groups (2.9 ± 2.1 vs. 3.2 ± 2.8 days, P = 0.45). The rate of improvement of a clinical and respiratory score, defined as secondary outcome, only showed a slightly faster improvement of the respiratory score in the intervention group when including stethoacoustic properties (P = 0.044). Complications were rare but occurred more frequently, although not significantly (P = 0.21), in the control arm. In conclusion, this study shows the absence of effectiveness of CP using passive expiratory techniques in infants hospitalised for bronchiolitis. It seems justified to recommend against the routine use of CP in these patients.

Carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy compared with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: IFCT-0501 randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is recommended to treat advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in fit, non-elderly adults, but monotherapy is recommended for patients older than 70 years. We compared a carboplatin and paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy regimen with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised trial we recruited patients aged 70-89 years with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and WHO performance status scores of 0-2. Patients received either four cycles (3 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of carboplatin (on day 1) plus paclitaxel (on days 1, 8, and 15) or five cycles (2 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy. Randomisation was done centrally with the minimisation method. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and analysis was done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number NCT00298415. FINDINGS: 451 patients were enrolled. 226 were randomly assigned monotherapy and 225 doublet chemotherapy. Median age was 77 years and median follow-up was 30.3 months (range 8.6-45.2). Median overall survival was 10.3 months for doublet chemotherapy and 6.2 months for monotherapy (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.78; p<0.0001); 1-year survival was 44.5% (95% CI 37.9-50.9) and 25.4% (19.9-31.3), respectively. Toxic effects were more frequent in the doublet chemotherapy group than in the monotherapy group (most frequent, decreased neutrophil count (108 [48.4%] vs 28 [12.4%]; asthenia 23 [10.3%] vs 13 [5.8%]). INTERPRETATION: Despite increased toxic effects, platinum-based doublet chemotherapy was associated with survival benefits compared with vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy in elderly patients with NSCLC. We feel that the current treatment paradigm for these patients should be reconsidered. FUNDING: Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique, Institut National du Cancer.

Temozolomide versus standard 6-week radiotherapy versus hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients older than 60 years with glioblastoma: the Nordic randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with glioblastoma are older than 60 years, but treatment guidelines are based on trials in patients aged only up to 70 years. We did a randomised trial to assess the optimum palliative treatment in patients aged 60 years and older with glioblastoma. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were recruited from Austria, Denmark, France, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey. They were assigned by a computer-generated randomisation schedule, stratified by centre, to receive temozolomide (200 mg/m(2) on days 1-5 of every 28 days for up to six cycles), hypofractionated radiotherapy (34·0 Gy administered in 3·4 Gy fractions over 2 weeks), or standard radiotherapy (60·0 Gy administered in 2·0 Gy fractions over 6 weeks). Patients and study staff were aware of treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN81470623. FINDINGS: 342 patients were enrolled, of whom 291 were randomised across three treatment groups (temozolomide n=93, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=98, standard radiotherapy n=100) and 51 of whom were randomised across only two groups (temozolomide n=26, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=25). In the three-group randomisation, in comparison with standard radiotherapy, median overall survival was significantly longer with temozolomide (8·3 months [95% CI 7·1-9·5; n=93] vs 6·0 months [95% CI 5·1-6·8; n=100], hazard ratio [HR] 0·70; 95% CI 0·52-0·93, p=0·01), but not with hypofractionated radiotherapy (7·5 months [6·5-8·6; n=98], HR 0·85 [0·64-1·12], p=0·24). For all patients who received temozolomide or hypofractionated radiotherapy (n=242) overall survival was similar (8·4 months [7·3-9·4; n=119] vs 7·4 months [6·4-8·4; n=123]; HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·63-1·06; p=0·12). For age older than 70 years, survival was better with temozolomide and with hypofractionated radiotherapy than with standard radiotherapy (HR for temozolomide vs standard radiotherapy 0·35 [0·21-0·56], p<0·0001; HR for hypofractionated vs standard radiotherapy 0·59 [95% CI 0·37-0·93], p=0·02). Patients treated with temozolomide who had tumour MGMT promoter methylation had significantly longer survival than those without MGMT promoter methylation (9·7 months [95% CI 8·0-11·4] vs 6·8 months [5·9-7·7]; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·34-0·93], p=0·02), but no difference was noted between those with methylated and unmethylated MGMT promoter treated with radiotherapy (HR 0·97 [95% CI 0·69-1·38]; p=0·81). As expected, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the temozolomide group were neutropenia (n=12) and thrombocytopenia (n=18). Grade 3-5 infections in all randomisation groups were reported in 18 patients. Two patients had fatal infections (one in the temozolomide group and one in the standard radiotherapy group) and one in the temozolomide group with grade 2 thrombocytopenia died from complications after surgery for a gastrointestinal bleed. INTERPRETATION: Standard radiotherapy was associated with poor outcomes, especially in patients older than 70 years. Both temozolomide and hypofractionated radiotherapy should be considered as standard treatment options in elderly patients with glioblastoma. MGMT promoter methylation status might be a useful predictive marker for benefit from temozolomide. FUNDING: Merck, Lion's Cancer Research Foundation, University of Umeå, and the Swedish Cancer Society.

Intensified chemotherapy with ACVBP plus rituximab versus standard CHOP plus rituximab for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (LNH03-2B): an open-label randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma has been substantially improved by the addition of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab to chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to assess, in patients aged 18-59 years, the potential survival benefit provided by a dose-intensive immunochemotherapy regimen plus rituximab compared with standard treatment plus rituximab. METHODS: We did an open-label randomised trial comparing dose-intensive rituximab, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vindesine, bleomycin, and prednisone (R-ACVBP) with subsequent consolidation versus standard rituximab, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Random assignment was done with a computer-assisted randomisation-allocation sequence with a block size of four. Patients were aged 18-59 years with untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and an age-adjusted international prognostic index equal to 1. Our primary endpoint was event-free survival. Our analyses of efficacy and safety were of the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00140595. FINDINGS: One patient withdrew consent before treatment and 54 did not complete treatment. After a median follow-up of 44 months, our 3-year estimate of event-free survival was 81% (95% CI 75-86) in the R-ACVBP group and 67% (59-73) in the R-CHOP group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·56, 95% CI 0·38-0·83; p=0·0035). 3-year estimates of progression-free survival (87% [95% CI, 81-91] vs 73% [66-79]; HR 0·48 [0·30-0·76]; p=0·0015) and overall survival (92% [87-95] vs 84% [77-89]; HR 0·44 [0·28-0·81]; p=0·0071) were also increased in the R-ACVBP group. 82 (42%) of 196 patients in the R-ACVBP group experienced a serious adverse event compared with 28 (15%) of 183 in the R-CHOP group. Grade 3-4 haematological toxic effects were more common in the R-ACVBP group, with a higher proportion of patients experiencing a febrile neutropenic episode (38% [75 of 196] vs 9% [16 of 183]). INTERPRETATION: Compared with standard R-CHOP, intensified immunochemotherapy with R-ACVBP significantly improves survival of patients aged 18-59 years with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with low-intermediate risk according to the International Prognostic Index. Haematological toxic effects of the intensive regimen were raised but manageable. FUNDING: Groupe d'Etudes des Lymphomes de l'Adulte and Amgen.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy of malignant pleural mesothelioma with or without hemithoracic radiotherapy (SAKK 17/04): a randomised, international, multicentre phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative hemithoracic radiotherapy has been used to treat malignant pleural mesothelioma, but it has not been assessed in a randomised trial. We assessed high-dose hemithoracic radiotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: We did this phase 2 trial in two parts at 14 hospitals in Switzerland, Belgium, and Germany. We enrolled patients with pathologically confirmed malignant pleural mesothelioma; resectable TNM stages T1-3 N0-2, M0; WHO performance status 0-1; age 18-70 years. In part 1, patients were given three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 given every 3 weeks) and extrapleural pneumonectomy; the primary endpoint was complete macroscopic resection (R0-1). In part 2, participants with complete macroscopic resection were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive high-dose radiotherapy or not. The target volume for radiotherapy encompassed the entire hemithorax, the thoracotomy channel, and mediastinal nodal stations if affected by the disease or violated surgically. A boost was given to areas at high risk for locoregional relapse. The allocation was stratified by centre, histology (sarcomatoid vs epithelioid or mixed), mediastinal lymph node involvement (N0-1 vs N2), and T stage (T1-2 vs T3). The primary endpoint of part 1 was the proportion of patients achieving complete macroscopic resection (R0 and R1). The primary endpoint in part 2 was locoregional relapse-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00334594. FINDINGS: We enrolled patients between Dec 7, 2005, and Oct 17, 2012. Overall, we analysed 151 patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 113 (75%) had extrapleural pneumonectomy. Median follow-up was 54·2 months (IQR 32-66). 52 (34%) of 151 patients achieved an objective response. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxic effects were neutropenia (21 [14%] of 151 patients), anaemia (11 [7%]), and nausea or vomiting (eight [5%]). 113 patients had extrapleural pneumonectomy, with complete macroscopic resection achieved in 96 (64%) of 151 patients. We enrolled 54 patients in part 2; 27 in each group. The main reasons for exclusion were patient refusal (n=20) and ineligibility (n=10). 25 of 27 patients completed radiotherapy. Median total radiotherapy dose was 55·9 Gy (IQR 46·8-56·0). Median locoregional relapse-free survival from surgery, was 7·6 months (95% CI 4·5-10·7) in the no radiotherapy group and 9·4 months (6·5-11·9) in the radiotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or higher toxic effects related to radiotherapy were nausea or vomiting (three [11%] of 27 patients), oesophagitis (two [7%]), and pneumonitis (two [7%]). One patient died of pneumonitis. We recorded no toxic effects data for the control group. INTERPRETATION: Our findings do not support the routine use of hemithoracic radiotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy. FUNDING: Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation, Eli Lilly.

Acetylcholinesterase inhibitor treatment for myasthenia gravis.

BACKGROUND: In myasthenia gravis, antibody-mediated blockade of acetylcholine receptors at the neuromuscular junction abolishes the naturally occurring 'safety factor' of synaptic transmission. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors provide temporary symptomatic treatment of muscle weakness but there is controversy about their long-term efficacy, dosage and side effects. This is the second update of a review published in The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2011. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in all forms of myasthenia gravis. SEARCH METHODS: On 8 July 2014 we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials regarding usage of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in myasthenia gravis. Two authors scanned the articles for any study eligible for inclusion. We also contacted the authors and known experts in the field to identify additional published or unpublished data and searched clinical trials registries for ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: The types of studies were randomised or quasi-randomised trials. Participants were myasthenia gravis patients diagnosed by an internationally accepted definition. The intervention was treatment with any form of acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. Types of outcome measures Primary outcome measureImprovement in the presenting symptoms within one to 14 days of the start of treatment. Secondary outcome measures(1) Improvement in the presenting symptoms more than 14 days after the start of treatment.(2) Change in impairment measured by a recognised and preferably validated scale, such as the quantitative myasthenia gravis score, within one to 14 days and more than 14 days after the start of treatment.(3) Myasthenia Gravis Association of America post-intervention status more than 14 days after start of treatment.(4) Adverse events including muscarinic side effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One author (MMM) extracted the data, which were checked by a second author. We contacted study authors for extra information and collected data on adverse effects from the trials. MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any large randomised or quasi-randomised trials of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in generalised myasthenia gravis either for the first version of this review or this update. One cross-over randomised trial using intranasal neostigmine in a total of 10 participants was only available as an abstract. It included three participants with ocular myasthenia gravis and seven with generalised myasthenia gravis. Symptoms of myasthenia gravis (measured as improvement in at least one muscle function) improved in nine of the 10 participants after the two-week neostigmine treatment phase. No participant improved after the placebo phase. Lack of detail in the report meant that the risk of bias was unclear. Adverse events were minor. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Except for one small and inconclusive trial of intranasal neostigmine, no other randomised controlled trials have been conducted on the use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in myasthenia gravis. The response to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in observational studies is so clear that a randomised controlled trial depriving participants in a placebo arm of treatment would be difficult to justify.