Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions

BACKGROUND: Although most clinical trials of coronary stents have measured nominally identical safety and effectiveness end points, differences in definitions and timing of assessment have created confusion in interpretation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Academic Research Consortium is an informal collaboration between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe. Two meetings, in Washington, DC, in January 2006 and in Dublin, Ireland, in June 2006, sponsored by the Academic Research Consortium and including representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and all device manufacturers who were working with the Food and Drug Administration on drug-eluting stent clinical trial programs, were focused on consensus end point definitions for drug-eluting stent evaluations. The effort was pursued with the objective to establish consistency among end point definitions and provide consensus recommendations. On the basis of considerations from historical legacy to key pathophysiological mechanisms and relevance to clinical interpretability, criteria for assessment of death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stent thrombosis were developed. The broadly based consensus end point definitions in this document may be usefully applied or recognized for regulatory and clinical trial purposes. CONCLUSION: Although consensus criteria will inevitably include certain arbitrary features, consensus criteria for clinical end points provide consistency across studies that can facilitate the evaluation of safety and effectiveness of these devices.

Clinical endpoints in peripheral endovascular revascularization trials: a case for standardized definitions

BACKGROUND: Endovascular therapy is a rapidly expanding option for the treatment of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), leading to a myriad of published studies reporting on various revascularization strategies. However, these reports are often difficult to interpret and compare because they do not utilize uniform clinical endpoint definitions. Moreover, few of these studies describe clinical outcomes from a patients' perspective. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DEFINE Group is a collaborative effort of an ad-hoc multidisciplinary team from various specialties involved in peripheral arterial disease therapy in Europe and the United States. DEFINE's goal was to arrive at a broad based consensus for baseline and endpoint definitions in peripheral endovascular revascularization trials for chronic lower limb ischemia. In this project, which started in 2006, the individual team members reviewed the existing pertinent literature. Following this, a series of telephone conferences and face-to-face meetings were held to agree upon definitions. Input was also obtained from regulatory (United States Food and Drug Administration) and industry (device manufacturers with an interest in peripheral endovascular revascularization) stakeholders, respectively. The efforts resulted in the current document containing proposed baseline and endpoint definitions in chronic lower limb PAD. Although the consensus has inevitably included certain arbitrary choices and compromises, adherence to these proposed standard definitions would provide consistency across future trials, thereby facilitating evaluation of clinical effectiveness and safety of various endovascular revascularization techniques. CONCLUSION: This current document is based on a broad based consensus involving relevant stakeholders from the medical community, industry and regulatory bodies. It is proposed that the consensus document may have value for study design of future clinical trials in chronic lower limb ischemia as well as for regulatory purposes.

Standardized definitions and clinical endpoints in trials investigating endovascular repair of aortic dissections.

OBJECTIVES Endovascular therapy is a rapidly expanding option for the treatment of patients with aortic dissection (AD) and various studies have been published. These trials, however, are often difficult to interpret and compare because they do not utilize uniform clinical endpoint definitions. METHODS The DEFINE Group is a collaborative effort of an ad hoc multidisciplinary team from various specialties involved in AD therapy in Europe and the United States. DEFINE's goal was to arrive at a broad based consensus for baseline and endpoint definitions in trials for endovascular therapy of various vascular pathologies. In this project, which started in December 2006, the individual team members reviewed the existing pertinent literature. Following this, a series of telephone conferences and face-to-face meetings were held to agree upon definitions. Input was also obtained from regulatory (United States Food and Drug Administration) and industry (device manufacturers with an interest in peripheral endovascular revascularization) stakeholders, respectively. RESULTS These efforts resulted in the present document containing proposed baseline and endpoint definitions for clinical and morphological outcomes. Although the consensus has inevitably included certain arbitrary consensus choices and compromises, adherence to these proposed standard definitions would provide consistency across future trials, thereby facilitating evaluation of clinical effectiveness and safety of various endovascular revascularization techniques. CONCLUSIONS This current document is based on a broad based consensus involving relevant stakeholders from the medical community, industry and regulatory bodies. It is proposed that the consensus document may have value for study design of future clinical trials in endovascular AD therapy as well as for regulatory purposes.

Clinical Perspectives from Randomized Phase 3 Trials on Prostate Cancer: An Analysis of the ClinicalTrials.gov Database

AbstractBackground It is not easy to overview pending phase 3 trials on prostate cancer (PCa), and awareness of these trials would benefit clinicians. Objective To identify all phase 3 trials on {PCa} registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov database with pending results. Design and setting On September 29, 2014, a database was established from the records for 175 538 clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A search of this database for the substring “prostat” identified 2951 prostate trials. Phase 3 trials accounted for 441 studies, of which 333 concerned only PCa. We selected only ongoing or completed trials with pending results, that is, for which the primary endpoint had not been published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. Results and limitations We identified 123 phase 3 trials with pending results. Trials were conducted predominantly in North America (n = 63; 51) and Europe (n = 47; 38). The majority were on nonmetastatic disease (n = 82; 67), with 37 (30) on metastatic disease and four trials (3) including both. In terms of intervention, systemic treatment was most commonly tested (n = 71; 58), followed by local treatment 34 (28), and both systemic and local treatment (n = 11; 9), with seven (6) trials not classifiable. The 71 trials on systemic treatment included androgen deprivation therapy (n = 34; 48), chemotherapy (n = 15; 21), immunotherapy (n = 9; 13), other systemic drugs (n = 9; 13), radiopharmaceuticals (n = 2; 3), and combinations (n = 2; 3). Local treatments tested included radiation therapy (n = 27; 79), surgery (n = 5; 15), and both (n = 2; 2). A limitation is that not every clinical trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Conclusion There are many {PCa} phase 3 trials with pending results, most of which address questions regarding systemic treatments for both nonmetastatic and metastatic disease. Radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy are the interventions most commonly tested for local and systemic treatment, respectively. Patient summary This report describes all phase 3 trials on prostate cancer registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov database with pending results. Most of these trials address questions regarding systemic treatments for both nonmetastatic and metastatic disease. Radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy are the interventions most commonly tested for local and systemic treatment, respectively.

Autologous hemopoietic stem cell transplantation in severe rheumatoid arthritis: A report from the EBMT and ABMTR

Objective. Since 1996, autologous hemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been used to treat severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To date, published reports have been individual cases or series containing small numbers. This study combined the worldwide experience in a single analysis. Methods. The Autoimmune Disease Databases of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and the Autologous Blood and Marrow Transplant Registry (ABMTR) were used to identify patients with RA treated with autologous HSCT. Further information relating to patient and treatment-specific variables was obtained by questionnaire. Results. Seventy-six patients were registered from 15 centers. Seventy-three patients had received autologous HSCT, and in 3 patients hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) were mobilized but not transplanted. Transplanted patients (median age 42 yrs, 74% female, 86% rheumatoid factor positive) had been previously treated with a mean of 5 (range 2-9) disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). Significant functional impairment was present, with a median Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score of 1.4 (range 1.1-2.0) and Steinbrocker score mean 2.39 (SD 0.58). The high dose treatment regimen was cyclophosphamide (CYC) alone in the majority of patients, mostly 200 mg/kg (n = 62). Seven patients received anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) in addition to CYC, 2 patients busulfan and CYC (BuCYC), and one patient CYC with total body irradiation and ATG. One patient received fludarabine with ATG. Following treatment, one patient received bone marrow but the rest received chemotherapy and/or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor mobilized peripheral blood stem cells. The harvest was unmanipulated in 28 patients, the rest receiving some form of lymphocyte depletion, mostly through CD34+ selection. Median followup was 16 months (range 3-55). Responses were measured using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. Forty-nine patients (67%) achieved at least ACR 50% response at some point following transplant. There was a significant reduction in the level of disability measured by the HAQ (p < 0.005). Most patients restarted DMARD within 6 months for persistent or recurrent disease activity, which provided disease control in about half the cases. Response was significantly related to seronegative RA (p = 0.02) but not to duration of disease, number of previous DMARD, presence of HLA-DR4, or removal of lymphocytes from the graft. There was no direct transplant related mortality, although one patient, treated with the BuCYC regimen, died 5 months post-transplant from infection and incidental non-small cell lung cancer. Conclusion. Autologous HSCT is a relatively safe form of salvage treatment in severe, resistant RA. In these open label studies significant responses were achieved in most patients, with over 50% achieving an ACR 50 or more response at 12 months. Although the procedure is not curative, recurrent or persistent disease activity may be subsequently controlled in some patients with DMARD. Clinical trials are necessary to develop this approach inpatients with aggressive disease who have failed conventional treatment including anti-tumor necrosis factor agents.

Minimal disease activity for rheumatoid arthritis: A preliminary definition

Agreement on response criteria in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has allowed better standardization and interpretation of clinical trial reports. With recent advances in therapy, the proportion of patients achieving a satisfactory state of minimal disease activity (MDA) is becoming a more important measure with which to compare different treatment strategies. The threshold for MDA is between high disease activity and remission and, by definition, anyone in remission will also be in MDA. True remission is still rare in RA; in addition, the American College of Rheumatology definition is difficult to apply in the context of trials. Participants at OMERACT 6 in 2002 agreed on a conceptual definition of minimal disease activity (MDA): "that state of disease activity deemed a useful target of treatment by both the patient and the physician, given current treatment possibilities and limitations." To prepare for a preliminary operational definition of MDA for use in clinical trials, we asked rheumatologists to assess 60 patient profiles describing real RA patients seen in routine clinical practice. Based on their responses, several candidate definitions for MDA were designed and discussed at the OMERACT 7 in 2004. Feedback from participants and additional on-site analyses in a cross-sectional database allowed the formulation of 2 preliminary, equivalent definitions of MDA: one based on the Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) index, and one based on meeting cutpoints in 5 out the 7 WHO/ILAR core set measures. Researchers applying these definitions first need to choose whether to use the DAS28 or the core set definition, because although each selects a similar proportion in a population, these are not always the same patients. In both MDA definitions, an initial decision node places all patients in MDA who have a tender joint count of 0 and a swollen joint count of 0, and an erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) no greater than 10 mm. If this condition is not met: center dot The DAS28 definition places patients in MDA when DAS28

Therapeutic efficacy and safety of chaperonin 10 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A double-blind randomised trial

Background Chaperonin 10 (heat shock protein 10, XToll(TM)) has anti-inflammatory properties related to the inhibition of Toll-like receptor signalling pathways. Our aim was to establish whether chaperonin 10 is safe and effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Methods in this randomised, double-blind, multicentre study, 23 patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were randomly allocated to three treatment groups receiving intravenous chaperonin 10 twice weekly for 12 weeks at doses of 5 mg (n=8), 7.5 mg (8), or 10 mg (7). The primary outcomes were change in disease activity score (DAS28) and improvement of core disease measures (American College of Rheumatology response score) from baseline to week 12. All analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered with the Australian Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRNO12606000041550. Findings Primary endpoint measures improved from day 14 in all groups and continued to improve to day 84. By end of study, a 20% improvement of core disease measures was seen in six (86%, 95% Cl 43-100), a 50% improvement in four (57%, 14-86), and a 70% improvement in two (29%, 0-57) patients given the highest dose of chaperonin 10. Clinical remission (as defined by a DAS28

Lyprinol : is it a useful anti-inflammatory agent?

The New Zealand green lipped mussel preparation Lyprinol is available without a prescription from a supermarket, pharmacy or Web. The Food and Drug Administration have recently warned Lyprinol USA about their extravagant anti-inflammatory claims for Lyprinol appearing on the web. These claims are put to thorough review. Lyprinol does have anti-inflammatory mechanisms, and has anti-inflammatory effects in some animal models of inflammation. Lyprinol may have benefits in dogs with arthritis. There are design problems with the clinical trials of Lyprinol in humans as an anti-inflammatory agent in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, making it difficult to give a definite answer to how effective Lyprinol is in these conditions, but any benefit is small. Lyprinol also has a small benefit in atopic allergy. As anti-inflammatory agents, there is little to choose between Lyprinol and fish oil. No adverse effects have been reported with Lyprinol. Thus, although it is difficult to conclude whether Lyprinol does much good, it can be concluded that Lyprinol probably does no major harm.

Clinical efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in osteoporosis and Paget's disease

Osteoporosis and Paget’s bone disease are the most common diseases of the bone. In addition to glucocorticoid treatment, there are many other secondary causes of osteoporosis. Bisphosphonates are used to treat these bone conditions. Zoledronic acid is the most potent bisphosphonate at inhibiting bone resorption. In osteoporosis, zoledronic acid increases bone mineral density for at least 1 year following a single intravenous administration. The efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in the treatment of osteoporosis and Paget’s bone disease are reviewed. This article also covers the studies of the effects of zoledronic acid in the bone loss associated with the secondary osteoporosis.

Good clinical endpoints with denosumab in osteoporosis and cancer

Background: Bone loss associated with low oestrogen levels in postmenopausal women, and with androgen deprivation therapy in men with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, result in an increased incidence of fractures. Denosumab has been shown to increase bone mineral density in these two conditions. Objectives/methods: The objective of this evaluation is to review the clinical trials that have studied clinical endpoints in these conditions. Results: FREEDOM (Fracture Reduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis Every 6 Months) was an International Phase III clinical trial that measured the clinical endpoints with denosumab in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. At 36 months, new vertebral fractures had occurred in 7.2% of subjects in the placebo group and this was lowered to 2.3% of subjects treated with denosumab. HALT (Denosumab Hormone Ablation Bone Loss Trial) studied the clinical endpoints in men with non-metastatic prostate cancer receiving androgen-deprivation therapy. The incidence of vertebral fractures was significantly lower in the denosumab group (1.5%) than in the placebo group (3.9%). The incidence of adverse effects with denosumab in both clinical trials was low. Conclusions: Denosumab reduces the incidence of fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and in men with non-metastatic prostate cancer receiving androgen-deprivation therapy. Denosumab is well tolerated.

Efficacy of a progressive walking program and glucosamine sulphate supplementation on osteoarthritic symptoms of the hip and knee: a feasibility trial

Introduction: Management of osteoarthritis (OA) includes the use of non-pharmacological and pharmacological therapies. Although walking is commonly recommended for reducing pain and increasing physical function in people with OA, glucosamine sulphate has also been used to alleviate pain and slow the progression of OA. This study evaluated the effects of a progressive walking program and glucosamine sulphate intake on OA symptoms and physical activity participation in people with mild to moderate hip or knee OA. Methods: Thirty-six low active participants (aged 42 to 73 years) were provided with 1500 mg glucosamine sulphate per day for 6 weeks, after which they began a 12-week progressive walking program, while continuing to take glucosamine. They were randomized to walk 3 or 5 days per week and given a pedometer to monitor step counts. For both groups, step level of walking was gradually increased to 3000 steps/day during the first 6 weeks of walking, and to 6000 steps/day for the next 6 weeks. Primary outcomes included physical activity levels, physical function (self-paced step test), and the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index for pain, stiffness and physical function. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-week follow-ups. The Mann Whitney Test was used to examine differences in outcome measures between groups at each assessment, and the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test was used to examine differences in outcome measures between assessments. Results: During the first 6 weeks of the study (glucosamine supplementation only), physical activity levels, physical function, and total WOMAC scores improved (P<0.05). Between the start of the walking program (Week 6) and the final follow-up (Week 24), further improvements were seen in these outcomes (P<0.05) although most improvements were seen between Weeks 6 and 12. No significant differences were found between walking groups. Conclusions: In people with hip or knee OA, walking a minimum of 3000 steps (~30 minutes), at least 3 days/week, in combination with glucosamine sulphate, may reduce OA symptoms. A more robust study with a larger sample is needed to support these preliminary findings. Trial Registration: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012607000159459.

Prospective, non-randomized phase 2 clinical trial of carboplatin plus paclitaxel with sequential radical pelvic radiotherapy for uterine papillary serous carcinoma

Objective Uterine Papillary Serous Carcinoma (UPSC) is uncommon and accounts for less than 5% of all uterine cancers. Therefore the majority of evidence about the benefits of adjuvant treatment comes from retrospective case series. We conducted a prospective multi-centre non-randomized phase 2 clinical trial using four cycles of adjuvant paclitaxel plus carboplatin chemotherapy followed by pelvic radiotherapy, in order to evaluate the tolerability and safety of this approach. Methods This trial enrolled patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated patients with stage 1b-4 (FIGO-1988) UPSC with a papillary serous component of at least 30%. Paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC 6) were administered on day 1 of each 3-week cycle for 4 cycles. Chemotherapy was followed by external beam radiotherapy to the whole pelvis (50.4 Gy over 5.5 weeks). Completion and toxicity of treatment (Common Toxicity Criteria, CTC) and quality of life measures were the primary outcome indicators. Results Twenty-nine of 31 patients completed treatment as planned. Dose reduction was needed in 9 patients (29%), treatment delay in 7 (23%), and treatment cessation in 2 patients (6.5%). Hematologic toxicity, grade 3 or 4 occurred in 19% (6/31) of patients. Patients' self-reported quality of life remained stable throughout treatment. Thirteen of the 29 patients with stages 1–3 disease (44.8%) recurred (average follow up 28.1 months, range 8–60 months). Conclusion This multimodal treatment is feasible, safe and tolerated reasonably well and would be suitable for use in multi-institutional prospective randomized clinical trials incorporating novel therapies in patients with UPSC.