Perfusion and diffusion MRI of glioblastoma progression in a four-year prospective temozolomide clinical trial

RESUME BUT Cette étude a été menée sur le suivi de patients traités pour un glioblastome nouvellement diagnostiqué. Son objectif a été de déterminer l'impact des séquences de perfusion et de diffusion en imagerie par résonance magnétique (IRM). Un intérêt particulier a été porté au potentiel de ces nouvelles techniques d'imagerie dans l'anticipation de la progression de la maladie. En effet, l'intervalle de temps libre de progression est une mesure alternative de pronostic fréquemment utilisée. MATERIEL ET METHODE L'étude a porté sur 41 patients participant à un essai clinique de phase II de traitement par temozolomide. Leur suivi radiologique a comporté un examen IRM dans les 21 à 28 jours après radiochimiothérapie et tous les 2 mois par la suite. L'évaluation des images s'est faite sur la base de l'évaluation de l'effet de masse ainsi que de la mesure de la taille de la lésion sur les images suivantes : T1 avec produit de contraste, T2, diffusion, perfusion. Afin de déterminer la date de progression de la maladie, les critères classiques de variation de taille adjoints aux critères cliniques habituels ont été utilisés. RESULAT 311 examens IRM ont été revus. Au moment de la progression (32 patients), une régression multivariée selon Cox a permis de déterminer deux paramètres de survie : diamètre maximal en T1 (p>0.02) et variation de taille en T2 (p<0.05). L'impact de la perfusion et de la diffusion n'a pas été démontré de manière statistiquement significative. CONCLUSION Les techniques de perfusion et de diffusion ne peuvent pas être utilisées pour anticiper la progression tumorale. Alors que la prise de décision au niveau thérapeutique est critique au moment de la progression de la maladie, l'IRM classique en T1 et en T2 reste la méthode d'imagerie de choix. De manière plus spécifique, une prise de contraste en T1 supérieure à 3 cm dans son plus grand diamètre associée à un hypersignal T2 en augmentation forment un marqueur de mauvais pronostic.

Clinical benefit and quality of life in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine versus gemcitabine alone: a randomized multicenter phase III clinical trial--SAKK 44/00-CECOG/PAN.1.3.001.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality of life (QOL) in patients receiving gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (Cap) versus single-agent Gem for advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral Cap 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks or until progression. CBR criteria and QOL indicators were assessed over this period. CBR was defined as improvement from baseline for >or= 4 consecutive weeks in pain (pain intensity or analgesic consumption) and Karnofsky performance status, stability in one but improvement in the other, or stability in pain and performance status but improvement in weight. RESULTS: Of 319 patients, 19% treated with GemCap and 20% treated with Gem experienced a CBR, with a median duration of 9.5 and 6.5 weeks, respectively (P < .02); 54% of patients treated with GemCap and 60% treated with Gem had no CBR (remaining patients were not assessable). There was no treatment difference in QOL (n = 311). QOL indicators were improving under chemotherapy (P < .05). These changes differed by the time to failure, with a worsening 1 to 2 months before treatment failure (all P < .05). CONCLUSION: There is no indication of a difference in CBR or QOL between GemCap and Gem. Regardless of their initial condition, some patients experience an improvement in QOL on chemotherapy, followed by a worsening before treatment failure.

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.

Clinical trial substantiates the predictive value of O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation in glioblastoma patients treated with temozolomide.

PURPOSE: In the setting of a prospective clinical trial, we determined the predictive value of the methylation status of the O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter for outcome in glioblastoma patients treated with the alkylating agent temozolomide. Expression of this excision repair enzyme has been associated with resistance to alkylating chemotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The methylation status of MGMT in the tumor biopsies was evaluated in 38 patients undergoing resection for newly diagnosed glioblastoma and enrolled in a Phase II trial testing concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide and radiation. The epigenetic silencing of the MGMT gene was determined using methylation-specific PCR. RESULTS: Inactivation of the MGMT gene by promoter methylation was associated with longer survival (P = 0.0051; Log-rank test). At 18 months, survival was 62% (16 of 26) for patients testing positive for a methylated MGMT promoter but reached only 8% (1 of 12) in absence of methylation (P = 0.002; Fisher's exact test). In the presence of other clinically relevant factors, methylation of the MGMT promoter remains the only significant predictor (P = 0.017; Cox regression). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective clinical trial identifies MGMT-methylation status as an independent predictor for glioblastoma patients treated with a methylating agent. The association of the epigenetic inactivation of the DNA repair gene MGMT with better outcome in this homogenous cohort may have important implications for the design of future trials and supports efforts to deplete MGMT by O-6-benzylguanine, a noncytotoxic substrate of this enzyme.

Subgroup And Quality Of Life Analyses Of The Phase Iii Clinical Trial Of Novottf-100a Versus Best Standard Chemotherapy For Recurrent Glioblastoma

BACKGROUND: NovoTTF is a portable device delivering low-intensity, intermediate-frequency, electric fields using noninvasive, disposable scalp electrodes. These fields physically interfere with cell division. Preliminary studies in recurrent and newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) have shown promising results. A phase III study in recurrent GBM has recently been concluded. METHODS: Adults (KPS ≥ 70%) with recurrent GBM (any recurrence) were randomized (stratified by surgery and center) to either NovoTTF administered continuously (20-24 hours/day, 7 days/week) or the best available chemotherapy (best physician choice [BPC]). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6), 1-year survival, and QOL were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-seven patients were randomized (28 centers in the United States and Europe) to either NovoTTF alone (120 patients) or BPC (117 patients). Patient characteristics were balanced, median age was 54 years (range, 23-80 years), median KPS was 80% (range, 50-100). One quarter had surgery for recurrence, and over half were at their second or more recurrence. A survival advantage for the device group was seen in patients treated according to protocol (median OS, 7.8 months vs. 6.1 months; n = 185; p = 0.01). Moreover, subgroup analysis in patients with better prognostic baseline characteristics (KPS ≥ 80%; age ≤ 60; 1st-3rd recurrence) demonstrated a robust survival benefit for NovoTTF patients compared to matched BPC patients (median OS, 8.8 months vs. 6.6 months; n = 110; p < 0.01). In this group, 1-year survival was 35% vs. 20% and PFS6 was 25.6% vs. 7.7%. Interestingly, in patients who failed bevacizumab prior to the trial, OS was also significantly extended by NovoTTF (4.4 months vs. 3.1 months; n = 23 vs. n = 21; p < 0.02). Quality of life was equivalent or superior in NovoTTF patients. CONCLUSIONS: NovoTTF, a noninvasive, novel cancer treatment modality shows significant therapeutic efficacy with improved quality of life. The impact of NovoTTF was more pronounced when patients with better baseline prognostic factors were treated. A large scale phase III clinical trial in newly diagnosed GBM is currently being conducted.

Levetiracetam versus Phenobarbital. Effects in the neurodevelopment in newborns treated for neonatal seizures: a clinical trial

Purpose: To analyze if the use of Phenobarbital compared with Levetiracetam, it’s associated with more neurodevelopmental problems in newborns treated for neonatal seizures. As a secondary objective identify which are the most affected areas of the neurodevelopment: cognition, socio-­‐emotional, motor or language skills.Design: A 5 years long clinical trial administering, with double-­‐blind and a randomized distribution of the sample, Phenobarbital or Levetiracetam for the management of neonatal seizures

Clinical trial designs for rare diseases: studies developed and discussed by the International Rare Cancers Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The past three decades have seen rapid improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of most cancers and the most important contributor has been research. Progress in rare cancers has been slower, not least because of the challenges of undertaking research. SETTINGS: The International Rare Cancers Initiative (IRCI) is a partnership which aims to stimulate and facilitate the development of international clinical trials for patients with rare cancers. It is focused on interventional--usually randomized--clinical trials with the clear goal of improving outcomes for patients. The key challenges are organisational and methodological. A multi-disciplinary workshop to review the methods used in ICRI portfolio trials was held in Amsterdam in September 2013. Other as-yet unrealised methods were also discussed. RESULTS: The IRCI trials are each presented to exemplify possible approaches to designing credible trials in rare cancers. Researchers may consider these for use in future trials and understand the choices made for each design. INTERPRETATION: Trials can be designed using a wide array of possibilities. There is no 'one size fits all' solution. In order to make progress in the rare diseases, decisions to change practice will have to be based on less direct evidence from clinical trials than in more common diseases.

Influence of M. tuberculosis lineage variability within a clinical trial for pulmonary tuberculosis.

Recent studies suggest that M. tuberculosis lineage and host genetics interact to impact how active tuberculosis presents clinically. We determined the phylogenetic lineages of M. tuberculosis isolates from participants enrolled in the Tuberculosis Trials Consortium Study 28, conducted in Brazil, Canada, South Africa, Spain, Uganda and the United States, and secondarily explored the relationship between lineage, clinical presentation and response to treatment. Large sequence polymorphisms and single nucleotide polymorphisms were analyzed to determine lineage and sublineage of isolates. Of 306 isolates genotyped, 246 (80.4%) belonged to the Euro-American lineage, with sublineage 724 predominating at African sites (99/192, 51.5%), and the Euro-American strains other than 724 predominating at non-African sites (89/114, 78.1%). Uneven distribution of lineages across regions limited our ability to discern significant associations, nonetheless, in univariate analyses, Euro-American sublineage 724 was associated with more severe disease at baseline, and along with the East Asian lineage was associated with lower bacteriologic conversion after 8 weeks of treatment. Disease presentation and response to drug treatment varied by lineage, but these associations were no longer statistically significant after adjustment for other variables associated with week-8 culture status.

Maintenance Therapy With Tumor-Treating Fields Plus Temozolomide vs Temozolomide Alone for Glioblastoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Glioblastoma is the most devastating primary malignancy of the central nervous system in adults. Most patients die within 1 to 2 years of diagnosis. Tumor-treating fields (TTFields) are a locoregionally delivered antimitotic treatment that interferes with cell division and organelle assembly. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of TTFields used in combination with temozolomide maintenance treatment after chemoradiation therapy for patients with glioblastoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: After completion of chemoradiotherapy, patients with glioblastoma were randomized (2:1) to receive maintenance treatment with either TTFields plus temozolomide (n = 466) or temozolomide alone (n = 229) (median time from diagnosis to randomization, 3.8 months in both groups). The study enrolled 695 of the planned 700 patients between July 2009 and November 2014 at 83 centers in the United States, Canada, Europe, Israel, and South Korea. The trial was terminated based on the results of this planned interim analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with TTFields was delivered continuously (>18 hours/day) via 4 transducer arrays placed on the shaved scalp and connected to a portable medical device. Temozolomide (150-200 mg/m2/d) was given for 5 days of each 28-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat population (significance threshold of .01) with overall survival in the per-protocol population (n = 280) as a powered secondary end point (significance threshold of .006). This prespecified interim analysis was to be conducted on the first 315 patients after at least 18 months of follow-up. RESULTS: The interim analysis included 210 patients randomized to TTFields plus temozolomide and 105 randomized to temozolomide alone, and was conducted at a median follow-up of 38 months (range, 18-60 months). Median progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat population was 7.1 months (95% CI, 5.9-8.2 months) in the TTFields plus temozolomide group and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.3-5.2 months) in the temozolomide alone group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [98.7% CI, 0.43-0.89]; P = .001). Median overall survival in the per-protocol population was 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.7-25.0 months) in the TTFields plus temozolomide group (n = 196) and 15.6 months (95% CI, 13.3-19.1 months) in the temozolomide alone group (n = 84) (HR, 0.64 [99.4% CI, 0.42-0.98]; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this interim analysis of 315 patients with glioblastoma who had completed standard chemoradiation therapy, adding TTFields to maintenance temozolomide chemotherapy significantly prolonged progression-free and overall survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00916409.

Identification of imaging selection patterns in acute ischemic stroke patients and the influence on treatment and clinical trial enrollment decision making.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: For the STroke Imaging Research (STIR) and VISTA-Imaging Investigators The purpose of this study was to collect precise information on the typical imaging decisions given specific clinical acute stroke scenarios. Stroke centers worldwide were surveyed regarding typical imaging used to work up representative acute stroke patients, make treatment decisions, and willingness to enroll in clinical trials. METHODS: STroke Imaging Research and Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Imaging circulated an online survey of clinical case vignettes through its website, the websites of national professional societies from multiple countries as well as through email distribution lists from STroke Imaging Research and participating societies. Survey responders were asked to select the typical imaging work-up for each clinical vignette presented. Actual images were not presented to the survey responders. Instead, the survey then displayed several types of imaging findings offered by the imaging strategy, and the responders selected the appropriate therapy and whether to enroll into a clinical trial considering time from onset, clinical presentation, and imaging findings. A follow-up survey focusing on 6 h from onset was conducted after the release of the positive endovascular trials. RESULTS: We received 548 responses from 35 countries including 282 individual centers; 78% of the centers originating from Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, Spain, United Kingdom, and United States. The specific onset windows presented influenced the type of imaging work-up selected more than the clinical scenario. Magnetic Resonance Imaging usage (27-28%) was substantial, in particular for wake-up stroke. Following the release of the positive trials, selection of perfusion imaging significantly increased for imaging strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Usage of vascular or perfusion imaging by Computed Tomography or Magnetic Resonance Imaging beyond just parenchymal imaging was the primary work-up (62-87%) across all clinical vignettes and time windows. Perfusion imaging with Computed Tomography or Magnetic Resonance Imaging was associated with increased probability of enrollment into clinical trials for 0-3 h. Following the release of the positive endovascular trials, selection of endovascular only treatment for 6 h increased across all clinical vignettes.

Levetiracetam versus Phenobarbital. Effects in the neurodevelopment in newborns treated for neonatal seizures: a clinical trial

Purpose: To analyze if the use of Phenobarbital compared with Levetiracetam, it’s associated with more neurodevelopmental problems in newborns treated for neonatal seizures. As a secondary objective identify which are the most affected areas of the neurodevelopment: cognition, socio-­‐emotional, motor or language skills.Design: A 5 years long clinical trial administering, with double-­‐blind and a randomized distribution of the sample, Phenobarbital or Levetiracetam for the management of neonatal seizures