839 resultados para TREATMENT TRIAL
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Survival outcomes for patients with glioblastoma remain poor, particularly for patients with unmethylated O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) gene promoter. This phase II, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial investigated the efficacy and safety of 2 dose regimens of the selective integrin inhibitor cilengitide combined with standard chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and an unmethylated MGMT promoter. METHODS: Overall, 265 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to standard cilengitide (2000 mg 2×/wk; n = 88), intensive cilengitide (2000 mg 5×/wk during wk 1-6, thereafter 2×/wk; n = 88), or a control arm (chemoradiotherapy alone; n = 89). Cilengitide was administered intravenously in combination with daily temozolomide (TMZ) and concomitant radiotherapy (RT; wk 1-6), followed by TMZ maintenance therapy (TMZ/RT→TMZ). The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, pharmacokinetics, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Median overall survival was 16.3 months in the standard cilengitide arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.686; 95% CI: 0.484, 0.972; P = .032) and 14.5 months in the intensive cilengitide arm (HR, 0.858; 95% CI: 0.612, 1.204; P = .3771) versus 13.4 months in the control arm. Median progression-free survival assessed per independent review committee was 5.6 months (HR, 0.822; 95% CI: 0.595, 1.134) and 5.9 months (HR, 0.794; 95% CI: 0.575, 1.096) in the standard and intensive cilengitide arms, respectively, versus 4.1 months in the control arm. Cilengitide was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Standard and intensive cilengitide dose regimens were well tolerated in combination with TMZ/RT→TMZ. Inconsistent overall survival and progression-free survival outcomes and a limited sample size did not allow firm conclusions regarding clinical efficacy in this exploratory phase II study.
Resumo:
Background: Non-adherence to antidepressants generates higher costs for the treatment of depression. Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist's interventions aimed at improving adherence to antidepressants. The study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in comparison with usual care in depressed patients initiating treatment with antidepressants in primary care. Methods: Patients were recruited by general practitioners and randomized to community pharmacist intervention (87) that received an educational intervention and usual care (92). Adherence to antidepressants, clinical symptoms, Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs), use of healthcare services and productivity losses were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Results: There were no significant differences between groups in costs or effects. From a societal perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the community pharmacist intervention compared with usual care was 1,866 for extra adherent patient and 9,872 per extra QALY. In terms of remission of depressive symptoms, the usual care dominated the community pharmacist intervention. If willingness to pay (WTP) is 30,000 per extra adherent patient, remission of symptoms or QALYs, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective was 0.71, 0.46 and 0.75, respectively (societal perspective). From a healthcare perspective, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective in terms of adherence, QALYs and remission was of 0.71, 0.76 and 0.46, respectively, if WTP is 30,000. Conclusion: A brief community pharmacist intervention addressed to depressed patients initiating antidepressant treatment showed a probability of being cost-effective of 0.71 and 0.75 in terms of improvement of adherence and QALYs, respectively, when compared to usual care. Regular implementation of the community pharmacist intervention is not recommended.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: The goal was to demonstrate that tailored therapy, according to tumor histology and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status, and the introduction of novel drug combinations in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer are promising for further investigation. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter phase II trial with mandatory EGFR testing and 2 strata. Patients with EGFR wild type received 4 cycles of bevacizumab, pemetrexed, and cisplatin, followed by maintenance with bevacizumab and pemetrexed until progression. Patients with EGFR mutations received bevacizumab and erlotinib until progression. Patients had computed tomography scans every 6 weeks and repeat biopsy at progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) ≥ 35% at 6 months in stratum EGFR wild type; 77 patients were required to reach a power of 90% with an alpha of 5%. Secondary end points were median PFS, overall survival, best overall response rate (ORR), and tolerability. Further biomarkers and biopsy at progression were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 77 evaluable patients with EGFR wild type received an average of 9 cycles (range, 1-25). PFS at 6 months was 45.5%, median PFS was 6.9 months, overall survival was 12.1 months, and ORR was 62%. Kirsten rat sarcoma oncogene mutations and circulating vascular endothelial growth factor negatively correlated with survival, but thymidylate synthase expression did not. A total of 20 patients with EGFR mutations received an average of 16 cycles. PFS at 6 months was 70%, median PFS was 14 months, and ORR was 70%. Biopsy at progression was safe and successful in 71% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: Both combination therapies were promising for further studies. Biopsy at progression was feasible and will be part of future SAKK studies to investigate molecular mechanisms of resistance.
Resumo:
We compared the health-related quality-of-life of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged over 65 years or transplant-ineligible in the pivotal, phase III FIRST trial. Patients received: i) continuous lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression; ii) fixed cycles of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone for 18 months; or iii) fixed cycles of melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide for 18 months. Data were collected using the validated questionnaires (QLQ-MY20, QLQ-C30, and EQ-5D). The analysis focused on the EQ-5D utility value and six domains pre-selected for their perceived clinical relevance. Lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone, and melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide improved patients' health-related quality-of-life from baseline over the duration of the study across all pre-selected domains of the QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D. In the QLQ-MY20, lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in the Disease Symptoms domain compared with melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide at Month 3, and significantly lower scores for QLQ-MY20 Side Effects of Treatment at all post-baseline assessments except Month 18. Linear mixed-model repeated-measures analyses confirmed the results observed in the cross-sectional analysis. Continuous lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone delays disease progression versus melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide and has been associated with a clinically meaningful improvement in health-related quality-of-life. These results further establish continuous lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone as a new standard of care for initial therapy of myeloma by demonstrating superior health-related quality-of-life during treatment, compared with melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Thromboxane prostaglandin receptors have been implicated to be involved in the atherosclerotic process. We assessed whether Terutroban, a thromboxane prostaglandin receptor antagonist, affects the progression of atherosclerosis, as measured by common carotid intima-media thickness and carotid plaques. METHODS: A substudy was performed among 1141 participants of the aspirin-controlled Prevention of Cerebrovascular and Cardiovascular Events of Ischemic Origin with Terutroban in Patients with a History of Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack (PERFORM) trial. Common carotid intima-media thickness and carotid plaque occurrence was measured during a 3-year period. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics did not differ between Terutroban (n=592) and aspirin (n=549) treated patients and were similar as in the main study. Mean study and treatment duration were similar (28 and 25 months, respectively). In the Terutroban group, the annualized rate of change in common carotid intima-media thickness was 0.006 mm per year (95% confidence interval, -0.004 to 0.016) and -0.005 mm per year (95% confidence interval, -0.015 to 0.005) in the aspirin group. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in the annualized rate of change of common carotid intima-media thickness (0.011 mm per year; 95% confidence interval, -0.003 to 0.025). At 12 months of follow-up, 66% of Terutroban patients had no emergent plaques, 31% had 1 to 2 emergent plaques, and 3% had ≥3 emergent plaques. In the aspirin group, the corresponding percentages were 64%, 32%, and 4%. Over time, there was no statistically significant difference in the number of emergent carotid plaques between treatment modalities (rate ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.07). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with aspirin, Terutroban did not beneficially affect progression of carotid atherosclerosis among well-treated patients with a history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attacks with an internal carotid stenosis <70%. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN66157730.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: One of the standard options in the treatment of stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer is neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery. We did a randomised trial to investigate whether the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy improves outcomes. METHODS: We enrolled patients in 23 centres in Switzerland, Germany and Serbia. Eligible patients had pathologically proven, stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer and were randomly assigned to treatment groups in a 1:1 ratio. Those in the chemoradiotherapy group received three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (100 mg/m(2) cisplatin and 85 mg/m(2) docetaxel) followed by radiotherapy with 44 Gy in 22 fractions over 3 weeks, and those in the control group received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. All patients were scheduled to undergo surgery. Randomisation was stratified by centre, mediastinal bulk (less than 5 cm vs 5 cm or more), and weight loss (5% or more vs less than 5% in the previous 6 months). The primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00030771. FINDINGS: From 2001 to 2012, 232 patients were enrolled, of whom 117 were allocated to the chemoradiotherapy group and 115 to the chemotherapy group. Median event-free survival was similar in the two groups at 12·8 months (95% CI 9·7-22·9) in the chemoradiotherapy group and 11·6 months (8·4-15·2) in the chemotherapy group (p=0·67). Median overall survival was 37·1 months (95% CI 22·6-50·0) with radiotherapy, compared with 26·2 months (19·9-52·1) in the control group. Chemotherapy-related toxic effects were reported in most patients, but 91% of patients completed three cycles of chemotherapy. Radiotherapy-induced grade 3 dysphagia was seen in seven (7%) patients. Three patients died in the control group within 30 days after surgery. INTERPRETATION: Radiotherapy did not add any benefit to induction chemotherapy followed by surgery. We suggest that one definitive local treatment modality combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy is adequate to treat resectable stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), Swiss Cancer League, and Sanofi.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of first-generation protease inhibitor based triple-therapy against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is limited in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with advanced liver fibrosis and non-response to previous peginterferon-ribavirin. These patients have a low chance of achieving a sustained virologic response (SVR) using first generation triple-therapy, with a success rate of only 20%. We investigated the efficacy and safety of lead-in therapy with intravenous silibinin followed by triple-therapy in this difficult-to-treat patient group. METHODOLOGY: Inclusion criteria were HIV/HCV coinfection with advanced liver fibrosis and documented previous treatment failure on peginterferon-ribavirin. The intervention was a lead-in therapy with intravenous silibinin 20 mg/kg/day for 14 days, followed by triple-therapy (peginterferon-ribavirin and telaprevir) for 12 weeks, and peginterferon-ribavirin alone for 36 weeks. Outcome measurements were HCV-RNA after silibinin lead-in and during triple-therapy, SVR data at week 12, and safety and tolerability of silibinin. RESULTS: We examined sixteen HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with previous peginterferon-ribavirin failure, of whom 14 had a fibrosis grade METAVIR ≥F3. All were on successful antiretroviral therapy. Median (IQR) HCV-RNA decline after silibinin therapy was 2.65 (2.1-2.8) log10 copies/mL. Fifteen of sixteen patients (94%) had undetectable HCV RNA at weeks 4 and 12, eleven patients (69%) showed end-of-treatment response (i.e., undetectable HCV-RNA at week 48), and ten patients (63%) reached SVR at week 12 (SVR 12). Six of the sixteen patients (37%) did not reach SVR 12: One patient had rapid virologic response (RVR) (i.e., undetectable HCV-RNA at week 4) but stopped treatment at week 8 due to major depression. Five patients had RVR, but experienced viral breakthroughs at week 21, 22, 25, or 32, or a relapse at week 52. The HIV RNA remained below the limit of detection in all patients during the complete treatment period. No serious adverse events and no significant drug-drug interactions were associated with silibinin. CONCLUSION: A lead-in with silibinin before triple-therapy was safe and highly effective in difficult-to-treat HIV/HCV coinfected patients, with a pronounced HCV-RNA decline during the lead-in phase, which translates into 63% SVR. An add-on of intravenous silibinin to standard of care HCV treatment is worth further exploration in selected difficult-to-treat patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01816490.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: Compliance with guidelines is increasingly used to benchmark the quality of hospital care, however, very little is known on patients admitted with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and treated palliatively. This study aimed to evaluate the baseline characteristics and outcomes of these patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Eighty-two Swiss hospitals enrolled patients from 1997 to 2014. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with ACS enrolled in the AMIS Plus registry (n=45,091) were analysed according to three treatment groups: palliative treatment, defined as use of aspirin and analgesics only and no reperfusion; conservative treatment, defined as any treatment including antithrombotics or anticoagulants, heparins, P2Y12 inhibitors, GPIIb/IIIa but no pharmacological or mechanical reperfusion; and reperfusion treatment (thrombolysis and/or percutaneous coronary intervention during initial hospitalisation). The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality and the secondary measure was 1-year mortality. RESULTS: Of the patients, 1485 (3.3%) were palliatively treated, 11,119 (24.7%) were conservatively treated and 32,487 (72.0%) underwent reperfusion therapy. In 1997, 6% of all patients were treated palliatively and this continuously decreased to 2% in 2013. Baseline characteristics of palliative patients differed in comparison with conservatively treated and reperfusion patients in age, gender and comorbidities (all p<0.001). These patients had more in-hospital complications such as postadmission onset of cardiogenic shock (15.6% vs 5.2%; p<0.001), stroke (1.8% vs 0.8%; p=0.001) and a higher in-hospital mortality (25.8% vs 5.6%; p<0.001).The subgroup of patients followed 1 year after discharge (n=8316) had a higher rate of reinfarction (9.2% vs 3.4%; p=0.003) and mortality (14.0% vs 3.5%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ACS treated palliatively were older, sicker, with more heart failure at admission and very high in-hospital mortality. While refraining from more active therapy may often constitute the most humane and appropriate approach, we think it is important to also evaluate these patients and include them in registries and outcome evaluations. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01 305 785.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Treatment strategies for mental disorders may vary according to illness stage. However no data currently exist to guide treatment in first episode psychotic mania. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy profile of chlorpromazine and olanzapine, as add-on to lithium, in patients with a first episode of psychotic mania, expecting better safety profile and adherence to olanzapine but similar efficacy for both treatments. METHODS: Data from 83 patients were collected in an 8-week randomised controlled trial on clinical variables, side effects, vital signs, and weight. Analyses of treatment differences over time were based on intent-to-treat principles. Kaplan-Meier estimated survival curves were used to analyse time-to-event data and mixed effects models repeated measures analysis of variance were used to determine treatment group differences over time on safety and efficacy measures. RESULTS: Ethics committee approval to delay informed consent procedure until recovery from the acute episode allowed the inclusion of 83 patients highly representative of those treated in the public sector. Contrary to our hypotheses, safety profile of both medications was similar. A signal for higher rate (P=.032) and earlier occurrence (P=.043) of mania remission was observed in the olanzapine group which did not survive correction for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine and chlorpromazine have a similar safety profile in a uniquely representative cohort of patients with first episode psychotic mania. The possibility for a greater impact of olanzapine on manic symptoms leading to earlier remission of the episode needs exploration in a large sample.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Fever is a frequent cause of medical consultation among returning travelers. The objectives of this study were to assess whether physicians were able to identify patients with influenza and whether the use of an influenza rapid diagnostic test (iRDT) modified the clinical management of such patients. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial conducted at 2 different Swiss hospitals between December 2008 and November 2012. Inclusion criteria were 1) age ≥18 years, 2) documented fever of ≥38 °C or anamnestic fever + cough or sore throat within the last 4 days, 3) illness occurring within 14 days after returning from a trip abroad, 4) no definitive alternative diagnosis. Physicians were asked to estimate the likelihood of influenza on clinical grounds, and a single nasopharyngeal swab was taken. Thereafter patients were randomized into 2 groups: i) patients with iRDT (BD Directigen A + B) performed on the nasopharyngeal swab, ii) patients receiving usual care. A quantitative PCR to detect influenza was done on all nasopharyngeal swabs after the recruitment period. Clinical management was evaluated on the basis of cost of medical care, number of X-rays requested and prescription of anti-infective drugs. RESULTS: 100 eligible patients were referred to the investigators. 93 patients had a naso-pharyngeal swab for a PCR and 28 (30%) swabs were positive for influenza. The median probability of influenza estimated by the physician was 70% for the PCR positive cases and 30% for the PCR negative cases (p < 0.001). The sensitivity of the iRDT was only 20%, and specificity 100%. Mean medical cost for the patients managed with iRDT and without iRDT were USD 581 (95%CI 454-707) and USD 661 (95%CI 522-800) respectively. 14/60 (23%) of the patients managed with iRDT were prescribed antibiotics versus 13/33 (39%) in the control group (p = 0.15). No patient received antiviral treatment. CONCLUSION: Influenza was a frequent cause of fever among these febrile returning travelers. Based on their clinical assessment, physicians had a higher level of suspicion for influenza in PCR positive cases. The iRDT used in this study showed a disappointingly low sensitivity and can therefore not be recommended for the management of these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00821626.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the FLAMINGO study at 48 weeks showed that patients taking dolutegravir once daily had a significantly higher virological response rate than did those taking ritonavir-boosted darunavir once daily, with similar tolerability. We present secondary efficacy and safety results analysed at 96 weeks. METHODS: FLAMINGO was a multicentre, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority study of HIV-1-infected treatment-naive adults. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to dolutegravir 50 mg or darunavir 800 mg plus ritonavir 100 mg, with investigator-selected combination tenofovir and emtricitabine or combination abacavir and lamivudine background treatment. The main endpoints were plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL and safety. The non-inferiority margin was -12%. If the lower end of the 95% CI was greater than 0%, then we concluded that dolutegravir was superior to ritonavir-boosted darunavir. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01449929. FINDINGS: Of 595 patients screened, 488 were randomly assigned and 484 included in the analysis (242 assigned to receive dolutegravir and 242 assigned to receive ritonavir-boosted darunavir). At 96 weeks, 194 (80%) of 242 patients in the dolutegravir group and 164 (68%) of 242 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir group had HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (adjusted difference 12·4, 95% CI 4·7-20·2; p=0·002), with the greatest difference in patients with high viral load at baseline (50/61 [82%] vs 32/61 [52%], homogeneity test p=0·014). Six participants (three since 48 weeks) in the dolutegravir group and 13 (four) in the darunavir plus ritonavir group discontinued because of adverse events. The most common drug-related adverse events were diarrhoea (23/242 [10%] in the dolutegravir group vs 57/242 [24%] in the darunavir plus ritonavir group), nausea (31/242 [13%] vs 34/242 [14%]), and headache (17/242 [7%] vs 12/242 [5%]). INTERPRETATION: Once-daily dolutegravir is associated with a higher virological response rate than is once-daily ritonavir-boosted darunavir. Dolutegravir compares favourably in efficacy and safety to a boosted darunavir regimen with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor background treatment for HIV-1-infected treatment-naive patients. FUNDING: ViiV Healthcare and Shionogi & Co.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding the different treatment options of status epilepticus (SE) in adults is scarce. Large randomized trials cover only one treatment at early stage and suggest the superiority of benzodiazepines over placebo, of intravenous lorazepam over intravenous diazepam or over intravenous phenytoin alone, and of intramuscular midazolam over intravenous lorazepam. However, many patients will not be treated successfully with the first treatment step. A large randomized trial covering the treatment of established status (ESETT) has just been funded recently by the NIH and will not start before 2015, with expected results in 2018; a trial on the treatment of refractory status with general anesthetics was terminated early due to insufficient recruitment. Therefore, a prospective multicenter observational registry was set up; this may help in clinical decision-making until results from randomized trials are available. METHODS/DESIGN: SENSE is a prospective, multicenter registry for patients treated for SE. The primary objective is to document patient characteristics, treatment modalities and in-house outcome of consecutive adults admitted for SE treatment in each of the participating centres and to identify predictors of outcome. Pre-treatment, treatment-related and outcome variables are documented systematically. To allow for meaningful multivariate analysis in the patient subgroups with refractory SE, a cohort size of 1000 patients is targeted. DISCUSSION: The results of the study will provide information about risks and benefits of specific treatment steps in different patient groups with SE at different points of time. Thus, it will support clinical decision-making and, furthermore, it will be helpful in the planning of treatment trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00000725.
Influence of M. tuberculosis lineage variability within a clinical trial for pulmonary tuberculosis.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
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.