First-line gefitinib in Caucasian EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients: a phase-IV, open-label, single-arm study.

BACKGROUND Phase-IV, open-label, single-arm study (NCT01203917) to assess efficacy and safety/tolerability of first-line gefitinib in Caucasian patients with stage IIIA/B/IV, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS Treatment: gefitinib 250 mg day(-1) until progression. Primary endpoint: objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints: disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety/tolerability. Pre-planned exploratory objective: EGFR mutation analysis in matched tumour and plasma samples. RESULTS Of 1060 screened patients with NSCLC (859 known mutation status; 118 positive, mutation frequency 14%), 106 with EGFR sensitising mutations were enrolled (female 70.8%; adenocarcinoma 97.2%; never-smoker 64.2%). At data cutoff: ORR 69.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 60.5-77.7), DCR 90.6% (95% CI 83.5-94.8), median PFS 9.7 months (95% CI 8.5-11.0), median OS 19.2 months (95% CI 17.0-NC; 27% maturity). Most common adverse events (AEs; any grade): rash (44.9%), diarrhoea (30.8%); CTC (Common Toxicity Criteria) grade 3/4 AEs: 15%; SAEs: 19%. Baseline plasma 1 samples were available in 803 patients (784 known mutation status; 82 positive; mutation frequency 10%). Plasma 1 EGFR mutation test sensitivity: 65.7% (95% CI 55.8-74.7). CONCLUSION First-line gefitinib was effective and well tolerated in Caucasian patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. Plasma samples could be considered for mutation analysis if tumour tissue is unavailable.

First-line gefitinib in Caucasian EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients: a phase-IV, open-label, single-arm study.

BACKGROUND: Phase-IV, open-label, single-arm study (NCT01203917) to assess efficacy and safety/tolerability of first-line gefitinib in Caucasian patients with stage IIIA/B/IV, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: TREATMENT: gefitinib 250 mg day(-1) until progression. Primary endpoint: objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints: disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety/tolerability. Pre-planned exploratory objective: EGFR mutation analysis in matched tumour and plasma samples. RESULTS: Of 1060 screened patients with NSCLC (859 known mutation status; 118 positive, mutation frequency 14%), 106 with EGFR sensitising mutations were enrolled (female 70.8%; adenocarcinoma 97.2%; never-smoker 64.2%). At data cutoff: ORR 69.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 60.5-77.7), DCR 90.6% (95% CI 83.5-94.8), median PFS 9.7 months (95% CI 8.5-11.0), median OS 19.2 months (95% CI 17.0-NC; 27% maturity). Most common adverse events (AEs; any grade): rash (44.9%), diarrhoea (30.8%); CTC (Common Toxicity Criteria) grade 3/4 AEs: 15%; SAEs: 19%. Baseline plasma 1 samples were available in 803 patients (784 known mutation status; 82 positive; mutation frequency 10%). Plasma 1 EGFR mutation test sensitivity: 65.7% (95% CI 55.8-74.7). CONCLUSION: First-line gefitinib was effective and well tolerated in Caucasian patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. Plasma samples could be considered for mutation analysis if tumour tissue is unavailable.

Safety and Effectiveness of two treatment regimes with tranexamic acid to minimize inflammatory response in elective cardiopulmonary bypass patients: a randomized double-blind, dose-dependent, phase IV clinical trial

Background. In cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) patients, fibrinolysis may enhance postoperative inflammatory response. We aimed to determine whether an additional postoperative dose of antifibrinolytic tranexamic acid (TA) reduced CPB-mediated inflammatory response (IR). Methods. We performed a randomized, double-blind, dose-dependent, parallel-groups study of elective CPB patients receiving TA. Patients were randomly assigned to either the single-dose group (40 mg/Kg TA before CPB and placebo after CPB) or the double-dose group (40 mg/Kg TA before and after CPB). Results. 160 patients were included, 80 in each group. The incident rate of IR was significantly lower in the double-dose-group TA2 (7.5% vs. 18.8% in the single-dose group TA1; P = 0.030). After adjusting for hypertension, total protamine dose and temperature after CPB, TA2 showed a lower risk of IR compared with TA1 [OR: 0.29 (95% CI: 0.10-0.83), (P = 0.013)]. Relative risk for IR was 2.5 for TA1 (95% CI: 1.02 to 6.12). The double-dose group had significantly lower chest tube bleeding at 24 hours [671 (95% CI 549-793 vs. 826 (95% CI 704-949) mL; P = 0.01 corrected-P significant] and lower D-dimer levels at 24 hours [489 (95% CI 437-540) vs. 621(95% CI: 563-679) ng/mL; P = 0.01 corrected-P significant]. TA2 required lower levels of norepinephrine at 24 h [0.06 (95% CI: 0.03-0.09) vs. 0.20(95 CI: 0.05-0.35) after adjusting for dobutamine [F = 6.6; P = 0.014 corrected-P significant]. We found a significant direct relationship between IL-6 and temperature (rho = 0.26; P < 0.01), D-dimer (rho = 0.24; P < 0.01), norepinephrine (rho = 0.33; P < 0.01), troponin I (rho = 0.37; P < 0.01), Creatine-Kinase (rho = 0.37; P < 0.01), Creatine Kinase-MB (rho = 0.33; P < 0.01) and lactic acid (rho = 0.46; P < 0.01) at ICU arrival. Two patients (1.3%) had seizure, 3 patients (1.9%) had stroke, 14 (8.8%) had acute kidney failure, 7 (4.4%) needed dialysis, 3 (1.9%) suffered myocardial infarction and 9 (5.6%) patients died. We found no significant differences between groups regarding these events. Conclusions. Prolonged inhibition of fibrinolysis, using an additional postoperative dose of tranexamic acid reduces inflammatory response and postoperative bleeding (but not transfusion requirements) in CPB patients. A question which remains unanswered is whether the dose used was ideal in terms of safety, but not in terms of effectiveness.

Use of Two-Part Regression Calibration Model to Correct for Measurement Error in Episodically Consumed Foods in a Single-Replicate Study Design: EPIC Case Study.

In epidemiologic studies, measurement error in dietary variables often attenuates association between dietary intake and disease occurrence. To adjust for the attenuation caused by error in dietary intake, regression calibration is commonly used. To apply regression calibration, unbiased reference measurements are required. Short-term reference measurements for foods that are not consumed daily contain excess zeroes that pose challenges in the calibration model. We adapted two-part regression calibration model, initially developed for multiple replicates of reference measurements per individual to a single-replicate setting. We showed how to handle excess zero reference measurements by two-step modeling approach, how to explore heteroscedasticity in the consumed amount with variance-mean graph, how to explore nonlinearity with the generalized additive modeling (GAM) and the empirical logit approaches, and how to select covariates in the calibration model. The performance of two-part calibration model was compared with the one-part counterpart. We used vegetable intake and mortality data from European Prospective Investigation on Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. In the EPIC, reference measurements were taken with 24-hour recalls. For each of the three vegetable subgroups assessed separately, correcting for error with an appropriately specified two-part calibration model resulted in about three fold increase in the strength of association with all-cause mortality, as measured by the log hazard ratio. Further found is that the standard way of including covariates in the calibration model can lead to over fitting the two-part calibration model. Moreover, the extent of adjusting for error is influenced by the number and forms of covariates in the calibration model. For episodically consumed foods, we advise researchers to pay special attention to response distribution, nonlinearity, and covariate inclusion in specifying the calibration model.