Concomitant Cisplatin and Hyperfractionated Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: Ten-year Follow-up of a Randomized Phase III Trial (SAKK 10/94)

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): To analyze the long-term outcome of treatment with concomitant cisplatin and hyperfractionated radiotherapy in locally advanced head and neck cancer compared with hyperfractionated radiotherapy alone. MATERIALS/METHODS: From July 1994 to July 2000 a total of 224 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were randomized to either hyperfractionated radiotherapy (median dose 74.4 Gy; 1.2 Gy twice daily) or the same radiotherapy combined with two cycles of concomitant cisplatin (20mg/m2 for 5 consecutive days of weeks 1 and 5). The primary endpoint was time to any treatment failure; secondary endpoints were locoregional failure, metastatic failure, overall survival, and late toxicity assessed according to RTOG criteria. The trial was registered at the National Institutes of Health (www.clinicaltrials.gov; identifier number: NCT00002654). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 9.5 years (range, 0.1 - 15.4 years). Median time to any treatment failure was not significantly different between treatment arms (p = 0.19). Locoregional control (p\0.05), distant metastasis-free survival (p = 0.02) and cancer specific survival (p = 0.03) were significantly improved in the combined treatment arm, with no difference in late toxicity between treatment arms. However, overall survival was not significantly different (p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: After long-term follow-up combined treatment with cisplatin and hyperfractionated, radiotherapy maintained an improved locoregional control, distant metastasis-free survival, and cancer specific survival as compared to hyperfractionated radiotherapy alone with no difference in late toxicity.

Radiotherapy and temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: recursive partitioning analysis of the EORTC 26981/22981-NCIC CE3 phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and National Cancer Institute of Canada trial on temozolomide (TMZ) and radiotherapy (RT) in glioblastoma (GBM) has demonstrated that the combination of TMZ and RT conferred a significant and meaningful survival advantage compared with RT alone. We evaluated in this trial whether the recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) retains its overall prognostic value and what the benefit of the combined modality is in each RPA class. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred seventy-three patients with newly diagnosed GBM were randomly assigned to standard postoperative RT or to the same RT with concomitant TMZ followed by adjuvant TMZ. The primary end point was overall survival. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer RPA used accounts for age, WHO performance status, extent of surgery, and the Mini-Mental Status Examination. RESULTS: Overall survival was statistically different among RPA classes III, IV, and V, with median survival times of 17, 15, and 10 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 32%, 19%, and 11%, respectively (P < .0001). Survival with combined TMZ/RT was higher in RPA class III, with 21 months median survival time and a 43% 2-year survival rate, versus 15 months and 20% for RT alone (P = .006). In RPA class IV, the survival advantage remained significant, with median survival times of 16 v 13 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 28% v 11%, respectively (P = .0001). In RPA class V, however, the survival advantage of RT/TMZ was of borderline significance (P = .054). CONCLUSION: RPA retains its prognostic significance overall as well as in patients receiving RT with or without TMZ for newly diagnosed GBM, particularly in classes III and IV.

Interpreting Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98: a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial comparing letrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, early breast cancer.

The Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study is a four-arm trial comparing 5 years of monotherapy with tamoxifen or with letrozole or with sequences of 2 years of one followed by 3 years of the other for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early invasive breast cancer. From 1998 to 2003, BIG -98 enrolled 8,010 women. The enhanced design f the trial enabled two complementary analyses of efficacy and safety. Collection of tumor specimens further enabled treatment comparisons based on tumor biology. Reports of BIG 1-98 should be interpreted in relation to each individual patient as she weighs the costs and benefits of available treatments. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT00004205.

Superiority of the Triple Combination of Bortezomib-Thalidomide-Dexamethasone Over the Dual Combination of Thalidomide-Dexamethasone in Patients With Multiple Myeloma Progressing or Relapsing After Autologous Transplantation: The MMVAR/IFM 2005-04 Randomized Phase III Trial From the Chronic Leukemia Working Party of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

PURPOSE This prospective multicenter phase III study compared the efficacy and safety of a triple combination (bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone [VTD]) versus a dual combination (thalidomide-dexamethasone [TD]) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) progressing or relapsing after autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS Overall, 269 patients were randomly assigned to receive bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2) intravenous bolus) or no bortezomib for 1 year, in combination with thalidomide (200 mg per day orally) and dexamethasone (40 mg orally once a day on 4 days once every 3 weeks). Bortezomib was administered on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 with a 10-day rest period (day 12 to day 21) for eight cycles (6 months), and then on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 with a 20-day rest period (day 23 to day 42) for four cycles (6 months). Results Median time to progression (primary end point) was significantly longer with VTD than TD (19.5 v 13.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.80; P = .001), the complete response plus near-complete response rate was higher (45% v 25%; P = .001), and the median duration of response was longer (17.2 v 13.4 months; P = .03). The 24-month survival rate was in favor of VTD (71% v 65%; P = .093). Grade 3 peripheral neuropathy was more frequent with VTD (29% v 12%; P = .001) as were the rates of grades 3 and 4 infection and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSION VTD was more effective than TD in the treatment of patients with MM with progressive or relapsing disease post-ASCT but was associated with a higher incidence of grade 3 neurotoxicity.

STRATEGIC-1: A multiple-lines, randomized, open-label GERCOR phase III study in patients with unresectable wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The management of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a comprehensive treatment strategy involving several lines of therapy, maintenance, salvage surgery, and treatment-free intervals. Besides chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan), molecular-targeted agents such as anti-angiogenic agents (bevacizumab, aflibercept, regorafenib) and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents (cetuximab, panitumumab) have become available. Ultimately, given the increasing cost of new active compounds, new strategy trials are needed to define the optimal use and the best sequencing of these agents. Such new clinical trials require alternative endpoints that can capture the effect of several treatment lines and be measured earlier than overall survival to help shorten the duration and reduce the size and cost of trials. METHODS/DESIGN: STRATEGIC-1 is an international, open-label, randomized, multicenter phase III trial designed to determine an optimally personalized treatment sequence of the available treatment modalities in patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC. Two standard treatment strategies are compared: first-line FOLFIRI-cetuximab, followed by oxaliplatin-based second-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab (Arm A) vs. first-line OPTIMOX-bevacizumab, followed by irinotecan-based second-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab, and by an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody with or without irinotecan as third-line treatment (Arm B). The primary endpoint is duration of disease control. A total of 500 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to one of the two treatment strategies. DISCUSSION: The STRATEGIC-1 trial is designed to give global information on the therapeutic sequences in patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC that in turn is likely to have a significant impact on the management of this patient population. The trial is open for inclusion since August 2013. TRIAL REGISTRATION: STRATEGIC-1 is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01910610, 23 July, 2013. STRATEGIC-1 is registered at EudraCT-No.: 2013-001928-19, 25 April, 2013.

Severity and burden of partial-onset seizures in a phase III trial of eslicarbazepine acetate.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare posttreatment seizure severity in a phase III clinical trial of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as adjunctive treatment of refractory partial-onset seizures. METHODS: The Seizure Severity Questionnaire (SSQ) was administered at baseline and posttreatment. The SSQ total score (TS) and component scores (frequency and helpfulness of warning signs before seizures [BS]; severity and bothersomeness of ictal movement and altered consciousness during seizures [DS]; cognitive, emotional, and physical aspects of postictal recovery after seizures [AS]; and overall severity and bothersomeness [SB]) were calculated for the per-protocol population. Analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline scores, estimated differences in posttreatment least square means between treatment arms. RESULTS: Out of 547 per-protocol patients, 441 had valid SSQ TS both at baseline and posttreatment. Mean posttreatment TS for ESL 1200mg/day was significantly lower than that for placebo (2.68 vs 3.20, p<0.001), exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID: 0.48). Mean DS, AS, and SB were also significantly lower with ESL 1200mg/day; differences in AS and SB exceeded the MCIDs. The TS, DS, AS, and SB were lower for ESL 800mg/day than for placebo; only SB was significant (p=0.013). For both ESL arms combined versus placebo, mean scores differed significantly for TS (p=0.006), DS (p=0.031), and SB (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic ESL doses led to clinically meaningful, dose-dependent reductions in seizure severity, as measured by SSQ scores. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study presents Class I evidence that adjunctive ESL (800 and 1200mg/day) led to clinically meaningful, dose-dependent seizure severity reductions, measured by the SSQ.

Randomised, multicentre, phase III, open-label study of alectinib vs crizotinib in treatment-naïve anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced NSCLC (ALEX study).

Background: In ∼5% of advanced NSCLC tumours, ALK tyrosine kinase is constitutively activated after translocation of ALK. ALK+ NSCLC was shown to be highly sensitive to the first approved ALK inhibitor, crizotinib. However, all pts eventually relapse on crizotinib mainly due to secondary ALK mutations/amplification or CNS metastases. Alectinib is a highly selective, potent, oral next-generation ALK inhibitor. Clinical phase II alectinib data in 46 crizotinib-naïve pts with ALK+ NSCLC reported an objective response rate (ORR) of 93.5% and a 1-year progression-free rate of 83% (95% CI: 68-92) (Inoue et al. J Thorac Oncol 2013). CNS activity was seen: of 14 pts with baseline brain metastasis, 11 had prior CNS radiation, 9 of these experienced CNS and systemic PFS of >12 months; of the 3 pts without prior CNS radiation, 2 were >15 months progression free. Trial design: Randomised, multicentre, phase III, open-label study in pts with treatment-naïve ALK+ advanced, recurrent, or metastatic NSCLC. All pts must provide pretreatment tumour tissue to confirm ALK rearrangement (by IHC). Pts (∼286 from ∼180 centres, ∼30 countries worldwide) will be randomised to alectinib (600mg oral bid, with food) or crizotinib (250mg oral bid, with/without food) until disease progression (PD), unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. Stratification factors are: ECOG PS (0/1 vs 2), race (Asian vs non-Asian), baseline CNS metastases (yes vs no). Primary endpoint: PFS by investigators (RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints: PFS by Independent Review Committee (IRC); ORR; duration of response; OS; safety; pharmacokinetics; quality of life. Additionally, time to CNS progression will be evaluated (MRI) for the first time in a prospective randomised NSCLC trial as a secondary endpoint. Pts with isolated asymptomatic CNS progression will be allowed to continue treatment beyond documented progression until systemic PD and/or symptomatic CNS progression, according to investigator opinion. Time to CNS progression will be retrospectively assessed by the IRC using two separate criteria, RECIST and RANO. Further details: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02075840). Disclosure: T.S.K. Mok: Advisory boards: AZ, Roche, Eli Lilly, Merck Serono, Eisai, BMS, AVEO, Pfizer, Taiho, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, GSK Biologicals, Clovis Oncology, Amgen, Janssen, BioMarin; board of directors: IASLC; corporate sponsored research: AZ; M. Perol: Advisory boards: Roche; S.I. Ou: Consulting: Pfizer, Chugai, Genentech Speaker Bureau: Pfizer, Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim; I. Bara: Employee: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd; V. Henschel: Employee and stock: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.; D.R. Camidge: Honoraria: Roche/Genentech. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Final results of the SAKK 16/00 trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation to chemotherapy alone in stage IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Aim: One standard option in the treatment of stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC is neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. We investigated in a randomized trial whether the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy would improve the outcome. Here we present the final results of this study. Methods: Patients (pts.) with pathologically proven, resectable stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC, performance status 0-1, and adequate organ function were randomized 1:1 to chemoradiation (CRT) with 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 and docetaxel 85 mg/m2 d1, q3weeks) followed by accelerated concomitant boost radiotherapy (RT) with 44 Gy in 22 fractions in 3 weeks, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (CT), with subsequent surgery for all pts. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). Results: 232 pts. were randomized in 23 centers, the median follow-up was 53 months. Two thirds were men, median age was 60 years (range 37-76). Histology was squamous cell in 33%, adenocarcinoma in 43%. Response rate to CRT was 61% vs. 44% with CT. 85% of all pts. underwent surgery, 30-day postoperative mortality was 1%. The rate of complete resection was 91% (CRT) vs. 81% (CT) and the pathological complete remission (pCR) rate was 16% vs. 12%. The median EFS was 13.1 months (95% CI 9.9 - 23.5) for the CRT group vs. 11.8 months (95% CI 8.4 - 15.2) in the CT arm (p 0.665). The median overall survival (OS) with CRT was 37.1 months (95% CI 22.6 -50), with CT 26.1 months ( 95% CI 26.1 - 52.1, p 0.938). The local failure rate was 23% in both arms. In the CT arm 12 pts. were given postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for R1 resection, 6 pts. received PORT in violation of the protocol. Pts. with a pCR, mediastinal downstaging to ypN0/1 and complete resection had a better outcome. Toxicity of chemotherapy was substantial, especially febrile neutropenia was common, whereas RT was well tolerated. Conclusions: This is the first completed phase III trial to evaluate the role of induction chemoradiotherapy and surgery, in comparison to neoadjuvant CT alone followed by surgery. RT was active, it increased response, complete resection and pCR rates. However, this failed to translate into an improvement of local control, EFS or OS. Notably, surgery after induction treatment was safe, including pneumonectomy. The overall survival rates of our neoadjuvant regimen are very encouraging, especially for a multicenter setting. Disclosure: M. Pless: Advisory Board for Sanofi; R. Cathomas: Advisory Board Sanofi D.C. Betticher: Advisory Board Sanofi. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Postoperative Adjuvant Lapatinib and Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Maintenance Lapatinib Monotherapy in High-Risk Patients With Resected Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: A Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: This multicenter phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lapatinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor/ErbB2 inhibitor, administered concomitantly with chemoradiotherapy and as maintenance monotherapy in patients with high-risk surgically treated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resected stage II to IVA SCCHN, with a surgical margin ≤ 5 mm and/or extracapsular extension, were randomly assigned to chemoradiotherapy (66 Gy total radiation dose and cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) per day administered on days 1, 22, and 43) plus placebo or lapatinib (1,500 mg per day) before and during chemoradiotherapy, followed by 12 months of maintenance monotherapy. RESULTS: Six hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled (lapatinib, n = 346; placebo, n = 342). With a median follow-up time of 35.3 months, the study ended early because of the apparent plateauing of disease-free survival (DFS) events. Median DFS assessed by an independent review committee was 53.6 months and not reached for lapatinib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.43). Investigator-assessed results confirmed the independent review committee assessment. No significant differences in DFS by human papillomavirus status or overall survival were observed between treatment arms. Similar numbers of patients in both treatment arms experienced adverse events (AEs), with more patients in the lapatinib arm than the placebo arm experiencing serious AEs (48% v 40%, respectively). The most commonly observed treatment-related AEs were diarrhea and rash, both predominantly in the lapatinib arm. CONCLUSION: Addition of lapatinib to chemoradiotherapy and its use as long-term maintenance therapy does not offer any efficacy benefits and had additional toxicity compared with placebo in patients with surgically treated high-risk SCCHN.

Sequential designs for phase III clinical trials incorporating treatment selection

Most statistical methodology for phase III clinical trials focuses on the comparison of a single experimental treatment with a control. An increasing desire to reduce the time before regulatory approval of a new drug is sought has led to development of two-stage or sequential designs for trials that combine the definitive analysis associated with phase III with the treatment selection element of a phase II study. In this paper we consider a trial in which the most promising of a number of experimental treatments is selected at the first interim analysis. This considerably reduces the computational load associated with the construction of stopping boundaries compared to the approach proposed by Follman, Proschan and Geller (Biometrics 1994; 50: 325-336). The computational requirement does not exceed that for the sequential comparison of a single experimental treatment with a control. Existing methods are extended in two ways. First, the use of the efficient score as a test statistic makes the analysis of binary, normal or failure-time data, as well as adjustment for covariates or stratification straightforward. Second, the question of trial power is also considered, enabling the determination of sample size required to give specified power. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Interim analyses and sequential designs in phase III studies

Recruitment of patients to a clinical trial usually occurs over a period of time, resulting in the steady accumulation of data throughout the trial's duration. Yet, according to traditional statistical methods, the sample size of the trial should be determined in advance, and data collected on all subjects before analysis proceeds. For ethical and economic reasons, the technique of sequential testing has been developed to enable the examination of data at a series of interim analyses. The aim is to stop recruitment to the study as soon as there is sufficient evidence to reach a firm conclusion. In this paper we present the advantages and disadvantages of conducting interim analyses in phase III clinical trials, together with the key steps to enable the successful implementation of sequential methods in this setting. Examples are given of completed trials, which have been carried out sequentially, and references to relevant literature and software are provided.

A Study of Compost Added to a Casing Technique in Agaricus bisporus Cultivation from Phase III Bulk Compost

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

A phase III randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial to determine the efficacy of low level laser therapy for the prevention of oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation

Introduction Oral mucositis (OM) is a significant early complication of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). This phase III randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study was designed to compare the ability of 2 different low level GaAlAs diode lasers (650 nm and 780 nm) to prevent oral mucositis in HCT patients conditioned with chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.Materials and methods Seventy patients were enrolled and randomized into 1 of 3 treatment groups: 650 nm laser, 780 nm laser or placebo. All active laser treatment patients received daily direct laser treatment to the lower labial mucosa, right and left buccal mucosa, lateral and ventral surfaces of the tongue, and floor of mouth with energy densities of 2 J/cm(2). Study treatment began on the first day of conditioning and continued through day +2 post HCT. Mucositis and oral pain was measured on days 0, 4, 7, 11, 14, 18, and 21 post HCT.Results the 650 nm wavelength reduced the severity of oral mucositis and pain scores. Low level laser therapy was well-tolerated and no adverse events were noted.Discussion While these results are encouraging, further study is needed to truly establish the efficacy of this mucositis prevention strategy. Future research needs to determine the effects of modification of laser parameters (e.g., wavelength, fluence, repetition rate of energy delivery, etc.) on the effectiveness of LLE laser to prevent OM.