6 resultados para collaborative trial

em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Sui


Relevância:

70.00% 70.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND: The utility of chemotherapy for women who experience a locoregional recurrence after primary treatment of early breast cancer remains an open question. An international collaborative trial is being conducted by the Breast International Group (BIG), the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG), and the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) to determine the effectiveness of cytotoxic therapy for these patients, either alone or in addition to selective use of hormonal therapy and trastuzumab. METHODS: The trial population includes women who have had a previous diagnosis of invasive breast cancer treated by mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery, but subsequently develop an isolated local and/or regional ipsilateral invasive recurrence. Excision of all macroscopic tumor without evidence of systemic disease is required for study entry. Patients are randomized to receive chemotherapy or no chemotherapy; type of chemotherapy is not protocol-specified. Radiation, hormonal therapy, and trastuzumab are given as appropriate. The primary endpoint is disease-free survival (DFS). Quality-of-life measurements are collected at baseline, and then at 9 and 12 months. The accrual goal is 977 patients. RESULTS: This report describes the characteristics of the first 99 patients. Sites of recurrence at study entry were: breast (56%), mastectomy scar/chest wall (35%), and regional lymph nodes (9%). Two-thirds of patients have estrogen-receptor-positive recurrences. CONCLUSION: This is the only trial actively investigating the question of "adjuvant" chemotherapy in locally recurrent breast cancer. The case mix of accrual to date indicates a broad representation of this patient population.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer have persistent, long-term risk of breast-cancer recurrence and death. Therefore, trials assessing endocrine therapies for this patient population need extended follow-up. We present an update of efficacy outcomes in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study at 8·1 years median follow-up.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors are considered standard adjuvant endocrine treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, but it remains uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors should be given upfront or sequentially with tamoxifen. Awaiting results from ongoing randomized trials, we examined prognostic factors of an early relapse among patients in the BIG 1-98 trial to aid in treatment choices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analyses included all 7707 eligible patients treated on BIG 1-98. The median follow-up was 2 years, and the primary end point was breast cancer relapse. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify prognostic factors. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty-five patients (3.7%) had an early relapse (3.1% on letrozole, 4.4% on tamoxifen). Predictive factors for early relapse were node positivity (P < 0.001), absence of both receptors being positive (P < 0.001), high tumor grade (P < 0.001), HER-2 overexpression/amplification (P < 0.001), large tumor size (P = 0.001), treatment with tamoxifen (P = 0.002), and vascular invasion (P = 0.02). There were no significant interactions between treatment and the covariates, though letrozole appeared to provide a greater than average reduction in the risk of early relapse in patients with many involved lymph nodes, large tumors, and vascular invasion present. CONCLUSION: Upfront letrozole resulted in significantly fewer early relapses than tamoxifen, even after adjusting for significant prognostic factors.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective To compare the effectiveness and safety of three types of stents (sirolimus eluting, paclitaxel eluting, and bare metal) in people with and without diabetes mellitus. Design Collaborative network meta-analysis. Data sources Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), relevant websites, reference lists, conference abstracts, reviews, book chapters, and proceedings of advisory panels for the US Food and Drug Administration. Manufacturers and trialists provided additional data. Review methods Network meta-analysis with a mixed treatment comparison method to combine direct within trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation. Overall mortality was the primary safety end point, target lesion revascularisation the effectiveness end point. Results 35 trials in 3852 people with diabetes and 10 947 people without diabetes contributed to the analyses. Inconsistency of the network was substantial for overall mortality in people with diabetes and seemed to be related to the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (P value for interaction 0.02). Restricting the analysis to trials with a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy of six months or more, inconsistency was reduced considerably and hazard ratios for overall mortality were near one for all comparisons in people with diabetes: sirolimus eluting stents compared with bare metal stents 0.88 (95% credibility interval 0.55 to 1.30), paclitaxel eluting stents compared with bare metal stents 0.91 (0.60 to 1.38), and sirolimus eluting stents compared with paclitaxel eluting stents 0.95 (0.63 to 1.43). In people without diabetes, hazard ratios were unaffected by the restriction. Both drug eluting stents were associated with a decrease in revascularisation rates compared with bare metal stents in people both with and without diabetes. Conclusion In trials that specified a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy of six months or more after stent implantation, drug eluting stents seemed safe and effective in people both with and without diabetes.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND Potentially avoidable risk factors continue to cause unnecessary disability and premature death in older people. Health risk assessment (HRA), a method successfully used in working-age populations, is a promising method for cost-effective health promotion and preventive care in older individuals, but the long-term effects of this approach are unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of an innovative approach to HRA and counselling in older individuals for health behaviours, preventive care, and long-term survival. METHODS AND FINDINGS This study was a pragmatic, single-centre randomised controlled clinical trial in community-dwelling individuals aged 65 y or older registered with one of 19 primary care physician (PCP) practices in a mixed rural and urban area in Switzerland. From November 2000 to January 2002, 874 participants were randomly allocated to the intervention and 1,410 to usual care. The intervention consisted of HRA based on self-administered questionnaires and individualised computer-generated feedback reports, combined with nurse and PCP counselling over a 2-y period. Primary outcomes were health behaviours and preventive care use at 2 y and all-cause mortality at 8 y. At baseline, participants in the intervention group had a mean ± standard deviation of 6.9 ± 3.7 risk factors (including unfavourable health behaviours, health and functional impairments, and social risk factors) and 4.3 ± 1.8 deficits in recommended preventive care. At 2 y, favourable health behaviours and use of preventive care were more frequent in the intervention than in the control group (based on z-statistics from generalised estimating equation models). For example, 70% compared to 62% were physically active (odds ratio 1.43, 95% CI 1.16-1.77, p = 0.001), and 66% compared to 59% had influenza vaccinations in the past year (odds ratio 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.66, p = 0.005). At 8 y, based on an intention-to-treat analysis, the estimated proportion alive was 77.9% in the intervention and 72.8% in the control group, for an absolute mortality difference of 4.9% (95% CI 1.3%-8.5%, p = 0.009; based on z-test for risk difference). The hazard ratio of death comparing intervention with control was 0.79 (95% CI 0.66-0.94, p = 0.009; based on Wald test from Cox regression model), and the number needed to receive the intervention to prevent one death was 21 (95% CI 12-79). The main limitations of the study include the single-site study design, the use of a brief self-administered questionnaire for 2-y outcome data collection, the unavailability of other long-term outcome data (e.g., functional status, nursing home admissions), and the availability of long-term follow-up data on mortality for analysis only in 2014. CONCLUSIONS This is the first trial to our knowledge demonstrating that a collaborative care model of HRA in community-dwelling older people not only results in better health behaviours and increased use of recommended preventive care interventions, but also improves survival. The intervention tested in our study may serve as a model of how to implement a relatively low-cost but effective programme of disease prevention and health promotion in older individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN 28458424.