Search

PURPOSE Docetaxel and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone or prednisolone (AAP) both improve survival when commenced alongside standard of care (SOC) androgen deprivation therapy in locally advanced or metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Thus, patient-reported quality of life (QOL) data may guide treatment choices. METHODS A group of patients within the STAMPEDE trial were contemporaneously enrolled with the possibility of being randomly allocated to receive either docetaxel + SOC or AAP + SOC. A mixed-model assessed QOL in those who had completed at least one QLQ-C30 + PR25 questionnaire. The primary outcome measure was difference in global-QOL (QLQ-C30 Q29&30) between patients allocated to docetaxel + SOC or AAP + SOC over the 2 years after random assignment, with a predefined criterion for clinically meaningful difference of > 4.0 points. Secondary outcome measures included longitudinal comparison of functional domains, pain, and fatigue, plus global-QOL at defined timepoints. RESULTS Five hundred fifteen patients (173 docetaxel + SOC and 342 AAP + SOC) were included. Baseline characteristics, proportion of missing data, and mean baseline global-QOL scores (docetaxel + SOC 77.8 and AAP + SOC 78.0) were similar. Over the 2 years following random assignment, the mean modeled global-QOL score was +3.9 points (95% CI, +0.5 to +7.2; P = .022) higher in patients allocated to AAP + SOC. Global-QOL was higher for patients allocated to AAP + SOC over the first year (+5.7 points, 95% CI, +3.0 to +8.5; P < .001), particularly at 12 (+7.0 points, 95% CI, +3.0 to +11.0; P = .001) and 24 weeks (+8.3 points, 95% CI, +4.0 to +12.6; P < .001). CONCLUSION Patient-reported QOL was superior for patients allocated to receive AAP + SOC, compared with docetaxel + SOC over a 2-year period, narrowly missing the predefined value for clinical significance. Patients receiving AAP + SOC reported clinically meaningful higher global-QOL scores throughout the first year following random assignment.

Background Fear of disease progression (FOP) is a rational concern for women with Ovarian Cancer (OC) and depression is also common. To date there have been no randomized trials assessing the impact of psychological intervention on depression and FOP in this patient group. Patients and methods Patients with primary or recurrent OC who had recently completed chemotherapy were eligible if they scored between 5 and 19 on the PHQ-9 depression and were randomized 1:1 to Intervention (3 standardized CBT-based sessions in the 6–12 weeks post-chemotherapy) or Control (standard of care). PHQ-9, FOP-Q-SF, EORTC QLQ C30 and OV28 questionnaires were then completed every 3 months for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was change in PHQ-9 at 3 months. Secondary endpoints were change in other scores at 3 months and all scores at later timepoints. Results 182 patients registered; 107 were randomized; 54 to Intervention and 53 to Control; mean age 59 years; 75 (70%) had completed chemotherapy for primary and 32 (30%) for relapsed OC and 67 patients completed both baseline and 3-month questionnaires. Improvement in PHQ-9 was observed for patients in both study arms at three months compared to baseline but there was no significant difference in change between Intervention and Control. A significant improvement on FOP-Q-SF scores was seen in the Intervention arm, whereas for those in the Control arm FOP-Q-SF scores deteriorated at 3 months (intervention effect = −4.4 (−7.57, −1.22), p-value = 0.008). Conclusions CBT-based psychological support provided after chemotherapy did not significantly alter the spontaneously improving trajectory of depression scores at three months but caused a significant improvement in FOP. Our findings call for the routine implementation of FOP support for ovarian cancer patients.

Summary Background It is unclear whether adjuvant or early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy is more appropriate for men who present with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. We aimed to prospectively plan a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing these radiotherapy approaches. Methods We used a prospective framework for adaptive meta-analysis (FAME), starting the review process while eligible trials were ongoing. RCTs were eligible if they aimed to compare immediate adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy, following radical prostatectomy in men (age ≥18 years) with intermediate-risk or high-risk, localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. We searched trial registers and conference proceedings until July 8, 2020, to identify eligible RCTs. By establishing the ARTISTIC collaboration with relevant trialists, we were able to anticipate when eligible trial results would emerge, and we developed and registered a protocol with PROSPERO before knowledge of the trial results (CRD42019132669). We used a harmonised definition of event-free survival, as the time from randomisation until the first evidence of either biochemical progression (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥0·4 ng/mL and rising after completion of any postoperative radiotherapy), clinical or radiological progression, initiation of a non-trial treatment, death from prostate cancer, or a PSA level of at least 2·0 ng/mL at any time after randomisation. We predicted when we would have sufficient power to assess whether adjuvant radiotherapy was superior to early salvage radiotherapy. Investigators supplied results for event-free survival, both overall and within predefined patient subgroups. Hazard ratios (HRs) for the effects of radiotherapy timing on event-free survival and subgroup interactions were combined using fixed-effect meta-analysis. Findings We identified three eligible trials and were able to obtain updated results for event-free survival for 2153 patients recruited between November, 2007, and December, 2016. Median follow-up ranged from 60 months to 78 months, with a maximum follow-up of 132 months. 1075 patients were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant radiotherapy and 1078 to a policy of early salvage radiotherapy, of whom 421 (39·1%) had commenced treatment at the time of analysis. Patient characteristics were balanced within trials and overall. Median age was similar between trials at 64 or 65 years (with IQRs ranging from 59 to 68 years) across the three trials and most patients (1671 [77·6%]) had a Gleason score of 7. All trials were assessed as having low risk of bias. Based on 270 events, the meta-analysis showed no evidence that event-free survival was improved with adjuvant radiotherapy compared with early salvage radiotherapy (HR 0·95, 95% CI 0·75–1·21; p=0·70), with only a 1 percentage point (95% CI −2 to 3) change in 5-year event-free survival (89% vs 88%). Results were consistent across trials (heterogeneity p=0·18; I2=42%). Interpretation This collaborative and prospectively designed systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that adjuvant radiotherapy does not improve event-free survival in men with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. Until data on long-term outcomes are available, early salvage treatment would seem the preferable treatment policy as it offers the opportunity to spare many men radiotherapy and its associated side-effects. Funding UK Medical Research Council.

Background Prostate radiotherapy (RT) is a first-line option for newly diagnosed men with low-burden metastatic prostate cancer. The current criterion to define this clinical state is based on manual bone metastasis counts, but enumeration of bone metastases is limited by interobserver variations, and it does not account for metastasis volume or lesional coalescence. The automated bone scan index (aBSI) is a quantitative method of evaluating bone metastatic burden in a standardised and reproducible manner. Objective To evaluate whether aBSI has utility as a predictive imaging biomarker to define a newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer population that might benefit from the addition of prostate RT to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy. Design, setting, and participants This is an exploratory analysis of men with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either SOC or SOC + prostate RT within the STAMPEDE “M1|RT comparison”. Intervention The SOC was lifelong androgen deprivation therapy, with up-front docetaxel permitted from December 2015. Men allocated RT received either a daily or a weekly schedule that was nominated before randomisation. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Baseline bone scans were evaluated retrospectively to calculate aBSI. We used overall (OS) and failure-free (FFS) survival as the end points. Treatment-aBSI interaction was evaluated using the multivariable fractional polynomial interaction (MFPI) and subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot. Further analysis was done in aBSI quartiles using Cox regression models adjusted for stratification factors. Results and limitations : Baseline bone scans for 660 (SOC: 323 and SOC + RT: 337) of 2061 men randomised within the “M1|RT comparison” met the software requirements for aBSI calculation. The median age was 68 yr, median PSA was 100 ng/mL, median aBSI was 0.9, and median follow-up was 39 mo. Baseline patient characteristics including aBSI were balanced between the treatment groups. Using the MFPI procedure, there was evidence of aBSI-treatment interaction for OS (p = 0.04, MFPI procedure) and FFS (p, Take Home Message In this exploratory analysis of 660 men with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer randomised within a clinical trial, a low automated bone scan index was found to be predictive of overall and failure-free survival benefit from the addition of prostate radiotherapy to standard of care systemic therapy. This was also observed with secondary clinical end points.

Summary Background The ICON8 study reported no significant improvement in progression-free survival (a primary endpoint) with weekly chemotherapy compared with standard 3-weekly treatment among patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. All ICON8 patients were eligible to take part in the accompanying health-related quality-of-life study, which measured the effect of treatment on self-reported wellbeing, reported here. Methods In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3, three-arm, Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) trial done at 117 hospital sites in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Republic of Ireland, women (aged at least 18 years) with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IC–IV ovarian cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally using minimisation to group 1 (intravenous carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6 and 175 mg/m2 intravenous paclitaxel every 3 weeks), group 2 (carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 every 3 weeks and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly), or group 3 (carboplatin AUC2 weekly and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly). Randomisation was stratified by GCIG group, disease stage, and outcome and timing of surgery. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients underwent immediate or delayed primary surgery according to clinicians' choice. Patients were asked to complete European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 questionnaires at enrolment, before each chemotherapy cycle, then 6-weekly up to 9 months, 3-monthly up to 2 years, and 6-monthly up to 5 years. Quality of life was a prespecified secondary outcome of the ICON8 study. Within the quality-of-life study, the co-primary endpoints were QLQ-C30 global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) and mean QLQ-C30 global health score from randomisation to 9 months (longitudinal analysis). Data analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01654146 and ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN10356387, and is currently in long-term follow up. Findings Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 patients were recruited into ICON8 (522 were included in group 1, 523 in group 2, and 521 in group 3). Baseline quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by 1438 (92%) of 1566 patients and 9-month questionnaires by 882 (69%) of 1280 patients. We observed no significant difference in global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) between study groups (group 2 vs group 1, difference in mean score 2·3, 95% CI −0·4 to 4·9, p=0·095; group 3 vs group 1, −0·8, −3·8 to 2·2, p=0·61). Using longitudinal analysis, we found lower global health scores for those receiving weekly paclitaxel than for those receiving 3-weekly chemotherapy (group 2 vs group 1, mean difference −1·8, 95% CI −3·6 to −0·1, p=0·043; group 3 vs group 1, −2·9, −4·7 to −1·1, p=0·0018). Interpretation We found no evidence of a difference in global quality of life between treatment groups at 9 months; however, patients receiving weekly treatment reported lower mean quality of life across the 9-month period after randomisation. Taken together with the lack of progression-free survival benefit, these findings do not support routine use of weekly paclitaxel-containing regimens in the management of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Funding Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.

5530 Background: ICON8 phase III trial did not show improvement in PFS or OS with first-line weekly dose-dense chemotherapy in EOC. This analysis evaluated the impact of tumor intrinsic primary chemosensitivity (assessed with modeled CA-125 ELIMination rate constant K (KELIM) based on the CA-125 kinetics during the first 100 days of chemo), on survival by treatment arms. Methods: Retrospective analysis of ICON8 where EOC patients were treated with chemo (Arm 1, standard (std) carboplatin AUC5-6 & paclitaxel 175mg/m2 q3weeks; Arm 2, carboplatin AUC 5-6 q3weeks and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2; or Arm 3, weekly carboplatin AUC 2 & paclitaxel 80 mg/m2; ratio1:1:1) and debulking primary surgery (immediate (IPS), or delayed (DPS)). The association between standardized KELIM (dichotomized as favorable ≥ 1, or unfavorable < 1) and efficacy of treatment arms and surgery completeness was assessed univariate & multivariate analyses. Results: Of 1,566 enrolled patients, KELIM was calculated in 1,004 with ≥ 3 CA-125 available values. KELIM did not differ by treatment arm. Irrespective of surgical strategy, both KELIM and surgery completeness were significant prognostic factors, but treatment arms were not. In 354 IPS patients, 225 had unfavorable KELIM (63%). Weekly dose-dense carboplatin-paclitaxel (Arm 3) (compared to std chemo-Arm 1) was associated with improved survival in unfavorable KELIM patients (PFS:19.6 vs 11.0 months, HR 0.80 [0.54-1.17]; OS : 53.7 vs 40.1 months, HR 0.75 [0.50-1.14]), and worse survival in those with favorable KELIM (PFS: 26.7 vs 48.2 months, HR 1.27 [0.72-2.22]; OS: NR vs 69.2 months, HR 1.05 [0.53-2.06]). Maximum benefit was seen in highest-risk diseases (unfavorable KELIM + incomplete IPS; n = 116; PFS: 17.0 vs 7.4 months, HR 0.49 [0.29-0.82]; OS: 42.6 vs 27.0 months, HR 0.56 [0.33-0.96]). In 611 patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemo +/- DPS (279 unfavorable KELIM, 46%), the same trend for higher survival benefit from dose-dense carboplatin-paclitaxel was found in those with unfavorable KELIM (PFS: 10.8 vs 7.4 months, HR 0.84 [0.63-1.13]; OS: 26.4 vs 23.5 months, HR 0.80 [0.60-1.08]), and reversely. The higher KELIM, the higher the likelihood of complete surgery (OR 4.82 [3.21-7.37]). The prognostic impact of the surgery completeness was greater in unfavorable KELIM patients. Conclusions: In ICON8 trial, both the tumor primary chemosensitivity (by KELIM) and completeness of debulking surgery were major drivers of the prognosis & survival. Dose-dense fractionated chemotherapy in 1st-line setting may be beneficial for patients with lower tumor chemosensitivity, whilst it might be detrimental in those with highly chemosensitive disease. The greatest OS benefit (HR 0.56) from dose-dense chemotherapy was seen in highest-risk diseases (unfavorable KELIM and incomplete IPS).

Background:\ud Carboplatin and paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks is standard-of-care first-line chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer. The Japanese JGOG3016 trial showed a significant improvement in progression-free and overall survival with dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and 3-weekly carboplatin. In this study, we aimed to compare efficacy and safety of two dose-dense weekly regimens to standard 3-weekly chemotherapy in a predominantly European population with epithelial ovarian cancer.\ud Methods:\ud In this phase 3 trial, women with newly diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IC–IV epithelial ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to group 1 (carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6 and 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel every 3 weeks), group 2 (carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 every 3 weeks and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly), or group 3 (carboplatin AUC2 and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly). Written informed consent was provided by all women who entered the trial. The protocol had the appropriate national research ethics committee approval for the countries where the study was conducted. Patients entered the trial after immediate primary surgery, or before neoadjuvant chemotherapy with subsequent planned delayed primary surgery. The trial coprimary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival. Data analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis, and were powered to detect a hazard ratio of 0·75 in progression-free survival. The main comparisons were between the control group (group 1) and each of the weekly research groups (groups 2 and 3).\ud Findings:\ud Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 women were randomly assigned to treatment. 72% (365), completed six protocol-defined treatment cycles in group 1, 60% (305) in group 2, and 63% (322) in group 3, although 90% (454), 89% (454), and 85% (437) completed six platinum-based chemotherapy cycles, respectively. Paclitaxel dose intensification was achieved with weekly treatment (median total paclitaxel dose 1010 mg/m2 in group 1; 1233 mg/m2 in group 2; 1274 mg/m2 in group 3). By February, 2017, 1018 (65%) patients had experienced disease progression. No significant progression-free survival increase was observed with either weekly regimen (restricted mean survival time 24·4 months [97·5% CI 23·0–26·0] in group 1, 24·9 months [24·0–25·9] in group 2, 25·3 months [23·9–26·9] in group 3; median progression-free survival 17·7 months [IQR 10·6–not reached] in group 1, 20·8 months [11·9–59·0] in group 2, 21·0 months [12·0–54·0] in group 3; log-rank p=0·35 for group 2 vs group 1; group 3 vs 1 p=0·51). Although grade 3 or 4 toxic effects increased with weekly treatment, these effects were predominantly uncomplicated. Febrile neutropenia and sensory neuropathy incidences were similar across groups.\ud Interpretation:\ud Weekly dose-dense chemotherapy can be delivered successfully as first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer but does not significantly improve progression-free survival compared with standard 3-weekly chemotherapy in predominantly European populations.\ud Funding:\ud Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, Cancer Australia.

Background Abiraterone acetate received licencing for use in only "high-risk" metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer (mHNPC) following the LATITUDE trial findings. However, a "risk"-related effect was not seen in the STAMPEDE trial. There remains uncertainty as to whether men with LATITUDE "low-risk" M1 disease benefit from androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with abiraterone acetate and prednisolone (AAP). Objective Evaluation of heterogeneity of effect between LATITUDE high- and low-risk M1 prostate cancer patients receiving ADT + AAP in the STAMPEDE trial. Design, setting, and participants A post hoc subgroup analysis of the 2017 STAMPEDE "abiraterone comparison". Staging scans for M1 patients contemporaneously randomised to ADT or ADT + AAP within the STAMPEDE trial were evaluated centrally and blind to treatment assignment. Stratification was by risk according to the criteria set out in the LATITUDE trial. Exploratory subgroup stratification incorporated the CHAARTED criteria. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS) and the secondary outcome measure was failure-free survival (FFS). Further exploratory analysis evaluated clinical skeletal-related events, progression-free survival (PFS), and prostate cancer-specific death. Standard Cox-regression and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were employed for analysis. Results and limitations A total of 901 M1 STAMPEDE patients were evaluated after exclusions. Of the patients, 428 (48%) were identified as having a low risk and 473 (52%) a high risk. Patients receiving ADT + AAP had significantly improved OS (low-risk hazard ratio [HR]: 0.66, 95% confidence interval or CI [0.44–0.98]) and FFS (low-risk HR: 0.24, 95% CI [0.17–0.33]) compared with ADT alone. Heterogeneity of effect was not seen between low- and high-risk groups for OS or FFS. For OS benefit in low risk, the number needed to treat was four times greater than that for high risk. However, this was not observed for the other measured endpoints. Conclusions Men with mHNPC gain treatment benefit from ADT + AAP irrespective of risk stratification for "risk" or "volume". Patient summary Coadministration of abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with prolonged overall survival and disease control, compared with ADT alone, in all men with metastatic disease starting hormone therapy for the first time.

Objectives: A proportion of HIV-infected children with advanced disease develop severe malnutrition soon after antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation. We tested the hypothesis that systemic inflammation underlies the pathogenesis of severe malnutrition in HIV-infected children. Design: Cross-sectional laboratory substudy in 613 HIV-infected children initiating ART in Uganda and Zimbabwe. Methods: We measured C-reactive protein (CRP), TNFα, IL-6 and soluble CD14 by ELISA in cryopreserved plasma at baseline (pre-ART) and week-4 (children with severe malnutrition only). Independent associations between baseline biomarkers and subsequent hospitalization for severe malnutrition were identified using multivariable fractional polynomial logistic regression. Results: Compared with children without severe malnutrition (n = 574, median age 6.3 years, median baseline weight-for-age Z-score −2.2), children hospitalized for severe malnutrition post-ART (n = 39, median age 2.3 years, median baseline weight-for-age Z-score −4.8) had higher baseline CRP [median 13.5 (interquartile range 5.5, 41.1) versus 4.1 (1.4, 14.4) mg/l; P = 0.003] and IL-6 [median 9.2 (6.7, 15.6) versus 5.9 (4.6, 9.3) pg/ml; P < 0.0001], but similar overall TNFα, soluble CD14 and HIV viral load (all P > 0.06). In a multivariable model, higher pre-ART IL-6, lower TNFα and lower weight-for-age were independently associated with subsequent hospitalization for severe malnutrition. Between weeks 0 and 4, there was a significant rise in CRP, IL-6 and soluble CD14, and fall in TNFα and HIV viral load in children hospitalized for severe malnutrition (all P < 0.02). Conclusion: Pre-ART IL-6 and TNFα were more strongly associated with hospitalization for severe malnutrition than CD4+ cell count or viral load, highlighting the importance of inflammation at the time of ART initiation in HIV-infected children.

Importance Prostate radiotherapy (RT) improves survival in men with low-burden metastatic prostate cancer. However, owing to the dichotomized nature of metastatic burden criteria, it is not clear how this benefit varies with bone metastasis counts and metastatic site. Objective To evaluate the association of bone metastasis count and location with survival benefit from prostate RT. Design, setting, and participants This exploratory analysis of treatment outcomes based on metastatic site and extent as determined by conventional imaging (computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging and bone scan) evaluated patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer randomized within the STAMPEDE trial's metastasis M1 RT comparison. The association of baseline bone metastasis counts with overall survival (OS) and failure-free survival (FFS) was assessed using a multivariable fractional polynomial interaction procedure. Further analysis was conducted in subgroups. Interventions Patients were randomized to receive either standard of care (androgen deprivation therapy with or without docetaxel) or standard of care and prostate RT. Main outcomes and measures The primary outcomes were OS and FFS. Results A total of 1939 of 2061 men were included (median [interquartile range] age, 68 [63-73] years); 1732 (89%) had bone metastases. Bone metastasis counts were associated with OS and FFS benefit from prostate RT. Survival benefit decreased continuously as the number of bone metastases increased, with benefit most pronounced up to 3 bone metastases. A plot of estimated treatment effect indicated that the upper 95% CI crossed the line of equivalence (hazard ratio [HR], 1) above 3 bone metastases without a detectable change point. Further analysis based on subgroups showed that the magnitude of benefit from the addition of prostate RT was greater in patients with low metastatic burden with only nonregional lymph nodes (M1a) or 3 or fewer bone metastases without visceral metastasis (HR for OS, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83; HR for FFS, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.47-0.70) than among patients with 4 or more bone metastases or any visceral/other metastasis (HR for OS, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.91-1.28; interaction P = .003; HR for FFS, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99; interaction P = .002). Conclusions and relevance In this exploratory analysis of a randomized clinical trial, bone metastasis count and metastasis location based on conventional imaging were associated with OS and FFS benefit from prostate RT in M1 disease. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00268476; ISRCTN.com Identifier: ISRCTN78818544.

Background Safety data is required to be collected in all clinical trials and can be separated into two types of data, adverse events and serious adverse events. Often, these types of safety data are collected as two discrete data sets, where adverse events that also meet the criteria for seriousness should be reported in both datasets. Safety analyses are often conducted using only the adverse event dataset, which should feature all safety events reported. We investigated whether the reporting of safety in both datasets was systematically followed and explored the impact of this on safety analyses in ICON8, an ovarian cancer clinical trial. Methods Text searches of serious adverse event data identified events that could potentially match the data reported in the adverse event dataset (looking at pre-specified AE terms only). These serious adverse events were then mapped to adverse event data according to predefined criteria: (a) event term matches, (b) date of onset and date of assessment within 30 days of each other, (c) date of assessment lies between date of onset and date of resolution and (d) events confirmed to occur in the same chemotherapy cycle. A combined dataset of all unique safety events (whether originally reported in the adverse event or serious adverse event dataset) was created and safety analyses re-performed. Results 51,019 adverse events were reported in ICON8, of which 42,410 were included in the mapping exercise. One thousand five hundred six serious adverse event elements were reported, of which 668 were included in the mapping exercise. Sixty-one percent of serious adverse event elements was matched to an already-reported adverse event. Supplementing these additional safety events and re-performing safety analyses increased the proportion of patients with at least one grade 3 or worse safety events in all arms from 42 to 47% in the control arm and 61 to 65% and 52 to 59% in the research arms. The difference in proportions of grade 3 or worse event in the research arms compared to the control arm changed by 18% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12 to 24%) and 12% (95% CI 6 to 18%), respectively. Conclusions There was low agreement in mapping serious adverse events to already reported adverse events, with nearly 40% of serious adverse events included in the mapping exercise not mapped to an already reported adverse event. Any analyses of safety data that use only adverse event datasets or do not clearly account for serious adverse event data will likely be missing important safety information. Reporting standards should make clear which datasets were used for analyses.

Summary Background Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by delayed primary surgery (DPS) is an established strategy for women with newly diagnosed, advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. Although this therapeutic approach has been validated in randomised, phase 3 trials, evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST), and cancer antigen 125 (CA125) has not been reported. We describe RECIST and Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) CA125 responses in patients receiving platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS in the ICON8 trial. Methods ICON8 was an international, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial done across 117 hospitals in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Ireland. The trial included women aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, life expectancy of more than 12 weeks, and newly diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO; 1988) stage IC–IIA high-grade serous, clear cell, or any poorly differentiated or grade 3 histological subtype, or any FIGO (1988) stage IIB–IV epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneum. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive intravenous carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6) and intravenous paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 by body surface area) on day 1 of every 21-day cycle (control group; group 1); intravenous carboplatin (AUC5 or AUC6) on day 1 and intravenous dose-fractionated paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 by body surface area) on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 21-day cycle (group 2); or intravenous dose-fractionated carboplatin (AUC2) and intravenous dose-fractionated paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 by body surface area) on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 21-day cycle (group 3). The maximum number of cycles of chemotherapy permitted was six. Randomisation was done with a minimisation method, and patients were stratified according to GCIG group, disease stage, and timing and outcome of cytoreductive surgery. Patients and clinicians were not masked to group allocation. The scheduling of surgery and use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were determined by local multidisciplinary case review. In this post-hoc exploratory analysis of ICON8, progression-free survival was analysed using the landmark method and defined as the time interval between the date of pre-surgical planning radiological tumour assessment to the date of investigator-assessed clinical or radiological progression or death, whichever occurred first. This definition is different from the intention-to-treat primary progression-free survival analysis of ICON8, which defined progression-free survival as the time from randomisation to the date of first clinical or radiological progression or death, whichever occurred first. We also compared the extent of surgical cytoreduction with RECIST and GCIG CA125 responses. This post-hoc exploratory analysis includes only women recruited to ICON8 who were planned for neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS and had RECIST and/or GCIG CA125-evaluable disease. ICON8 is closed for enrolment and follow-up, and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01654146 . Findings Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 women were enrolled in ICON8, of whom 779 (50%) were planned for neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS. Median follow-up was 29·5 months (IQR 15·6–54·3) for the neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS population. Of 564 women who had RECIST-evaluable disease at trial entry, 348 (62%) had a complete or partial response. Of 727 women who were evaluable by GCIG CA125 criteria at the time of diagnosis, 610 (84%) had a CA125 response. Median progression-free survival was 14·4 months (95% CI 9·2–28·0; 297 events) for patients with a RECIST complete or partial response and 13·3 months (8·1–20·1; 171 events) for those with RECIST stable disease. Median progression-free survival for women with a GCIG CA125 response was 13·8 months (95% CI 8·8–23·4; 544 events) and 9·7 months (5·8–14·5; 111 events) for those without a GCIG CA125 response. Complete cytoreduction (R0) was achieved in 187 (56%) of 335 women with a RECIST complete or partial response and 73 (42%) of 172 women with RECIST stable disease. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 290 (50%) of 576 women with a GCIG CA125 response and 30 (30%) of 101 women without a GCIG CA125 response. Interpretation The RECIST-defined radiological response rate was lower than that frequently quoted to patients in the clinic. RECIST and GCIG CA125 responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer should not be used as individual predictive markers to stratify patients who are likely to benefit from DPS, but instead used in conjunction with the patient's clinical capacity to undergo cytoreductive surgery. A patient should not be denied surgery based solely on the lack of a RECIST or GCIG CA125 response. Funding Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.

Bevacizumab is approved as a maintenance treatment in first-line setting in advanced-stage III-IV ovarian cancers, because GOG-0218 and ICON-7 phase III trials demonstrated progression-free survival benefits. However, only the subgroup of patients with high-risk diseases (stage IV, and incompletely resected stage III) derived an overall survival (OS) gain in the ICON-7 trial (4.8 months). The modeled CA-125 elimination rate constant K (KELIM) parameter, based on the longitudinal CA-125 kinetics during the first 100 days of chemotherapy, is a potential indicator of the tumor primary chemo-sensitivity. In the ICON-7 trial dataset, the OS of patients within the low- and high-risk disease groups was assessed according to treatment arms and KELIM. Among the patients with high-risk diseases, those with favorable standardized KELIM of at least 1.0 (n = 214, 46.7%) had no survival benefit from bevacizumab, whereas those with unfavorable KELIM less than 1.0 (n = 244, 53.2%) derived the highest OS benefit (absolute difference = 9.1 months, 2-sided log-rank P = .10; Cox hazard ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval = 0.58 to 1.04, 2-sided P = .09).

Summary Background The optimal timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer is uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy versus an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) biochemical progression. Methods We did a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with at least one risk factor (pathological T-stage 3 or 4, Gleason score of 7–10, positive margins, or preoperative PSA ≥10 ng/mL) for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT). The study took place in trial-accredited centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to adjuvant radiotherapy or an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression (PSA ≥0·1 ng/mL or three consecutive rises). Masking was not deemed feasible. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned radiotherapy schedule (52·5 Gy in 20 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions), and centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom from distant metastases, designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with salvage radiotherapy (control) to 95% at 10 years with adjuvant radiotherapy. We report on biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used. A hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1 favoured adjuvant radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. Findings Between Nov 22, 2007, and Dec 30, 2016, 1396 patients were randomly assigned, 699 (50%) to salvage radiotherapy and 697 (50%) to adjuvant radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years (IQR 60–68). Median follow-up was 4·9 years (IQR 3·0–6·1). 649 (93%) of 697 participants in the adjuvant radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 6 months; 228 (33%) of 699 in the salvage radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 8 years after randomisation. With 169 events, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival was 85% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 88% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 1·10, 95% CI 0·81–1·49; p=0·56). Freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy at 5 years was 93% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 92% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·58–1·33; p=0·53). Self-reported urinary incontinence was worse at 1 year for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (mean score 4·8 vs 4·0; p=0·0023). Grade 3–4 urethral stricture within 2 years was reported in 6% of individuals in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 4% in the salvage radiotherapy group (p=0·020). Interpretation These initial results do not support routine administration of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy increases the risk of urinary morbidity. An observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy. Funding Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit, and Canadian Cancer Society.

International audience; Previous studies have shown targeting different tissues via the transcutaneous (TC) and intramuscular injection (IM) with or without electroporation (EP) has the potential to trigger immune responses to DNA vaccination. The CUTHIVTHER 001 Phase I/II randomized controlled clinical trial was designed to determine whether the mode of DNA vaccination delivery (TC+IM or EP+IM) could influence the quality and function of induced cellular immune responses compared to placebo, in an HIV positive clade B cohort on antiretroviral therapy (ART). The GTU®MultiHIV B DNA vaccine DNA vaccine encoded a MultiHIV B clade fusion protein to target the cellular response. Overall the vaccine and regimens were safe and well-tolerated. There were robust pre-vaccination IFN-γ responses with no measurable change following vaccination compared to placebo. However, modest intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) responses were seen in the TC+IM group. A high proportion of individuals demonstrated potent viral inhibition at baseline that was not improved by vaccination. These results show that HIV positive subjects with nadir CD4+ counts ≥250 on suppressive ART display potent levels of cellular immunity and viral inhibition, and that DNA vaccination alone is insufficient to improve such responses. These data suggest that more potent prime-boost vaccination strategies are likely needed to improve pre-existing responses in similar HIV-1 cohorts (This study has been registered at http://ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT02457689).

This is an accepted manuscript of an abstract published by Elsevier in Annals of Oncology on 01/09/2021, available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2021.08.2098 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.

Background Few studies have investigated metabolic complications in HIV-infected African children and their relation with inflammation. Methods We compared baseline and changes in insulin resistance [homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR)] and in markers of inflammation over 48 weeks, in a subset of antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive Ugandan children from the Children with HIV in Africa-Pharmacokinetics and Adherence/Acceptability of Simple Antiretroviral Regimens trial randomized to zidovudine-, stavudine- or abacavir (ABC)-based regimen. Nonparametric methods were used to explore between-group and within-group differences, and multivariable analysis to assess associations of HOMA-IR. Results One-hundred eighteen children were enrolled, and median age (interquartile range) was 2.8 years (1.7-4.3). Baseline median HOMA-IR (interquartile range) was 0.49 (0.38-1.07) and similar between the arms. At week 48, median relative changes in HOMA-IR were 14% (-29% to 97%) in the zidovudine arm, -1% (-30% to 69%) in the stavudine arm and 6% (-34% to 124%) in the ABC arm (P ≤ 0.03 for all the arms compared with baseline, but P = 0.90 for between-group differences). Several inflammation markers significantly decreased in all study arms; soluble CD14 increased on ABC and did not change in the other 2 arms. In multivariate analysis, only changes in soluble CD163 were positively associated with HOMA-IR changes. Conclusions In ART-naive Ugandan children, HOMA-IR changed significantly after 48 weeks of ART and correlated with monocyte activation.

BACKGROUND: The ICON6 trial showed that cediranib, an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3, improved clinical outcomes for patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer when it was used with chemotherapy and was continued as maintenance therapy. This study describes health-related quality of life (QOL) during the first year of treatment. METHODS: Four hundred fifty-six women were randomly allocated to receive standard chemotherapy only, chemotherapy with concurrent cediranib, or chemotherapy with cediranib administered concurrently and continued as maintenance. Patients completed QOL questionnaires until disease progression every 3 weeks during chemotherapy and then every 6 weeks to 1 year. Patients alive with disease progression completed a QOL form 1 year after randomization. The primary QOL endpoint was the global score from the Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer) at 1 year, with the standard chemotherapy group compared with the concurrent-maintenance cediranib group. RESULTS: The rate of questionnaire compliance was 90% at the baseline and 76% at 1 year and was similar across the 3 groups. The mean global QOL score at 1 year was 62.6 points for the standard chemotherapy group and 68.7 points for the concurrent-maintenance group (+4.5; 95% confidence interval, –2.0 to 11.0; P = .18). Sensitivity analyses suggested that this finding was robust to the effect of missing data, and the improvement became statistically significant after adjustments for self-reported diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: The 6th study by the International Collaboration in Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON6) showed a significant improvement in progression-free survival with cediranib as concurrent and maintenance therapy. No QOL detriment with cediranib was found 1 year after treatment was commenced. The maintenance of QOL along with prolonged cancer control suggests that cediranib has a valuable role in the treatment of relapsed ovarian cancer.

Background\ud \ud STAMPEDE has previously reported that the use of upfront docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report on long-term outcomes stratified by metastatic burden for M1 patients.\ud \ud \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud We randomly allocated patients in 2 : 1 ratio to standard-of-care (SOC; control group) or SOC + docetaxel. Metastatic disease burden was categorised using retrospectively-collected baseline staging scans where available. Analysis used Cox regression models, adjusted for stratification factors, with emphasis on restricted mean survival time where hazards were non-proportional.\ud \ud \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Between 05 October 2005 and 31 March 2013, 1086 M1 patients were randomised to receive SOC (n = 724) or SOC + docetaxel (n = 362). Metastatic burden was assessable for 830/1086 (76%) patients; 362 (44%) had low and 468 (56%) high metastatic burden. Median follow-up was 78.2 months. There were 494 deaths on SOC (41% more than the previous report). There was good evidence of benefit of docetaxel over SOC on OS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69–0.95, P = 0.009) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P = 0.827). Analysis of other outcomes found evidence of benefit for docetaxel over SOC in failure-free survival (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.57–0.76, P 0.5 in each case). There was no evidence that docetaxel resulted in late toxicity compared with SOC: after 1 year, G3-5 toxicity was reported for 28% SOC and 27% docetaxel (in patients still on follow-up at 1 year without prior progression).\ud \ud \ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud The clinically significant benefit in survival for upfront docetaxel persists at longer follow-up, with no evidence that benefit differed by metastatic burden. We advocate that upfront docetaxel is considered for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients regardless of metastatic burden.

A high level of adherence to antiretroviral treatment is essential for optimal clinical outcomes in HIV infection, but measuring adherence is difficult. We investigated whether responses to a questionnaire eliciting caregiver beliefs in medicines were associated with adherence of their child (median age 2.8 years), and whether this in turn was associated with viral suppression. We used the validated beliefs in medicine questionnaire (BMQ) to measure caregiver beliefs, and medication event monitoring system caps to measure adherence. We found significant associations between BMQ scores and adherence, and between adherence and viral suppression. Among children initiating Antiretroviral therapy (ART), we also found significant associations between BMQ ‘necessity’ scores, and BMQ ‘necessity-concerns’ scores, and later viral suppression. This suggests that the BMQ may be a valuable tool when used alongside other adherence measures, and that it remains important to keep caregivers well informed about the long-term necessity of their child’s ART. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10461-016-1582-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence is critical for successful HIV treatment outcomes. Once-daily dosing could improve adherence. Plasma concentrations of once-daily vs twice-daily abacavir + lamivudine are bioequivalent in children, but no randomized trial has compared virological outcomes. Methods Children taking abacavir + lamivudine-containing first-line regimens twice daily for more than 36 weeks in the ARROW trial (NCT02028676, ISRCTN24791884) were randomized to continue twice-daily vs move to once-daily abacavir + lamivudine (open-label). Co-primary outcomes were viral load suppression at week 48 (12% noninferiority margin, measured retrospectively) and lamivudine or abacavir-related grade 3/4 adverse events. Results Six hundred and sixty-nine children (median 5 years, range 1-16) were randomized to twice daily (n = 333) vs once daily (n = 336) after median 1.8 years on twice-daily abacavir + lamivudine-containing first-line ART. Children were followed for median 114 weeks. At week 48, 242/331 (73%) twice daily vs 236/330 (72%) once daily had viral load less than 80 copies/ml [difference -1.6% (95% confidence interval -8.4,+5.2%) P = 0.65]; 79% twice daily vs 78% once daily had viral load less than 400 copies/ml (P = 0.76) (week 96 results similar). One grade 3/4 adverse event was judged uncertainly related to abacavir + lamivudine (hepatitis; once daily). At week 48, 9% twice daily vs 10% once daily reported missing one or more ART pills in the last 4 weeks (P = 0.74) and 8 vs 8% at week 96 (P = 0.90). Carers strongly preferred once-daily dosing. There was no difference between randomized groups in postbaseline drug-resistance mutations or drug-susceptibility; WHO 3/4 events; ART-modifying, grade 3/4 or serious adverse events; CD4% or weight-for-age/height-for-age (all P > 0.15). Conclusion Once-daily abacavir + lamivudine was noninferior to twice daily in viral load suppression, with similar resistance, adherence, clinical, immunological and safety outcomes. Abacavir + lamivudine provides the first once-daily nucleoside backbone across childhood that can be used to simplify ART.

Background Bevacizumab is used extensively in the treatment of cancer, including advanced ovarian cancer, for which results of the International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON) 7 trial have been recently reported. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (NICE's) recent decision not to recommend bevacizumab for advanced ovarian cancer was not based on evidence related to the unlicensed lower dosage (7.5 mg/kg) of the drug despite its use in the English National Health Service (NHS) and the ICON7 trial. Objective To report on the findings of an analysis that considered whether the lower dose is cost-effective. Methods Cost-effectiveness analysis is assessed from the perspective of the English NHS and health outcomes expressed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The analysis focuses on a clinically predefined high-risk subgroup of the ICON7 trial. The price at which the lower dose of bevacizumab could be considered cost-effective for the English NHS is presented for a range of scenarios to inform decisions about price negotiations by international health systems. Results In the base-case analysis, bevacizumab has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £48,975 per additional QALY, which is above NICE's standard cost-effectiveness threshold (£20,000–£30,000 per QALY). The official price of bevacizumab in 2013 was between £2.31 and £2.63 per milligram. A price reduction of between 46% and 67%, dependent on the NICE threshold, would be required for the product to be cost-effective in the high-risk subgroup. Conclusions The lower dose of bevacizumab for advanced ovarian cancer is not cost-effective based on the product's list price and using NICE's cost-effectiveness thresholds. Significant price discounts would be needed to make the drug affordable to the NHS.

AIM: To characterise the efavirenz steady-state pharmacokinetics in African children using model-based approach, quantifying demographic and genotypic effects on the drug's disposition, and conduct simulations allowing prediction of optimised doses of efavirenz in this population. METHODS: We modelled the steady-state population pharmacokinetics of efavirenz in Ugandan and Zambian children using nonlinear mixed-effects modelling. Individual mid-dose efavirenz concentrations were derived and simulations explored genotype-based dose optimisation strategies. RESULTS: A 2-compartment model with absorption through transit compartments well described 2086 concentration-time points in 169 children. The combined effect of SNPs 516GT and 983TC explained 44.5% and 14.7% of the variability in efavirenz clearance and bioavailability, respectively. The detected frequencies of composite CYP2B6 genotype were 0.33 for 516GG|983TT, 0.35 for 516GT|983TT, 0.06 for 516GG|983TC, 0.18 for 516TT|983TT, 0.07 516GT|983TC and 0.01 for 516GG|983CC. The corresponding estimated clearance rates were 6.94, 4.90, 3.93, 1.92, 1.36, and 0.74 L/h for a 15.4 kg child and median (95% CI) observed mid-dose concentrations 1.55 (0.51-2.94), 2.20 (0.97-4.40), 2.03 (1.19-4.53), 7.55 (2.40-14.74), 7.79 (3.66-24.59) and 18.22 (11.84-22.76) mg/L, respectively. Simulations showed that wild-type individuals had exposures at the bottom of therapeutic range, while slower metabolisers were over-exposed. CONCLUSIONS: Dosage guidelines for African children should take into consideration the combined effect of SNPs CYP2B6 516G > T and 983 T > C.

14 Background: Docetaxel (DOC) and abiraterone (ABI) both improve overall survival (OS) in men with locally advanced or metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) but no head to head trials compare the 2 agents. STAMPEDE, a multi-arm multi-stage platform trial, recruited patients (pts) to treatments including DOC or ABI between Nov-11 and Mar-13. There was no evidence OS differed between DOC or ABI, thus quality of life (QOL) may increasingly inform treatment options. Methods: QOL scores were analysed in pts contemporaneously randomised to receive DOC or ABI, in addition to standard of care treatment. Self-assessment QOL questionnaires EORTC QLQ C30 and PR25 were completed during treatment and follow-up. These analyses focus on average global QOL over the first 2 years after randomisation, using repeated measures analysis, plus cross-sectional analyses at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. A score difference of ≥4 points was pre-defined as clinically meaningful. Results: 173 men randomised to DOC and 342 men randomised to ABI participated in the QOL sub-study and contributed to this analysis. Baseline characteristics and proportion of missing data were similar between groups. Baseline global QOL scores were similar (mean (sd): DOC 77.8 (20) and ABI 78.0 (19.3)). Average global QOL over 2 years was higher in pts randomised to ABI than DOC, although the difference was statistically significant it did not meet the pre-defined clinical parameter (+3.9, 95%CI 0.6 to 7.1, p=0.021). Cross-sectional analyses showed clinically meaningful superior QOL in the ABI group at 3 and 6 months (+6.6, 95%CI 2.6 to 10.7, p=0.001; +8.0, 95%CI 3.6 to 12.3, p

Background The optimal timing of RT after RP for prostate cancer (PCa) is uncertain. RADICALS-RT compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant RT (aRT) versus an observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure (Obs+sRT). Methods Patients with post-op PSA≤0.2ng/ml and ≥1 risk factor (pT3/4, Gleason 7-10, positive margins or pre-op PSA≥10ng/ml) were randomised ≤22wk after surgery to aRT or Obs+sRT for PSA failure (PSA≥0.1ng/ml or 3 consecutive rises). Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, RT schedule (52.5Gy/20f, 66Gy/33f) and centre. The primary outcome measure (OM) was freedom-from-distant metastases (FFDM) with >1200 pts needed for 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% to 95% at 10yr with aRT. It is too early to present results on the primary OM, but we present secondary OMs: bPFS (any of PSA≥0.4ng/ml post-RT, PSA≥2.0ng/ml at any time, local/distant progression, deferred HT, PCa death), freedom-from-non-protocol hormone therapy (HT), safety (RTOG scale), and patient reported OMs (ICSmaleSF). Standard survival analysis methods were used. Results 1396 pts were randomised (697 aRT, 699 Obs+sRT) from Oct-2007 to Dec-2016 (82% UK, 13% Denmark, 4% Canada, 1% Ireland). Median follow-up is 5yr. 93% (649/697) aRT started RT within 5mo; 33% (228/699) Obs+sRT started RT by 8yr after randomisation; 26% (166/649) aRT and 31% (71/228) Obs+sRT reported HT with their RT. With 169 events, bPFS at 5yr was 85% v 88% for aRT and Obs+sRT, respectively: HR = 1.10 (95%CI 0.81-1.49, p = 0.56). Freedom-from-non-protocol HT at 5yr was 92% v 94% (HR = 1.24, 95%CI 0.76-2.01, p = 0.39). Self-reported urinary incontinence was worse at 1yr in 5.3% vs 2.7% (p = 0.008), and RTOG Grade 3/4 urethral stricture was reported at any time in 8% vs 5% (p = 0.03), for aRT & Obs+sRT, respectively. Conclusions First results from RADICALS-RT do not show a benefit for aRT after RP in this patient group. Further follow-up is needed to report on long-term OMs, including FFDM. Adjuvant RT after RP increases risk of urinary morbidity. An observation policy with sRT for PSA failure should be the current standard after RP. Clinical trial identification ISRCTN 40814031. Legal entity responsible for the study University College London. Funding Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Canadian Cancer Trials Group. Disclosure C. Parker: Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Research Funding, Speaker Fees and Advisory Board Honoraria: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy, Advisory Board Honoraria: AAA; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Speaker Fees: Janssen. N.W. Clarke: Advisory / Consultancy, Consultation and advisory fees: Janssen. C. Catton: Advisory / Consultancy, Consulting fees: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (self), Consulting fees and research support: AbbVie; Advisory / Consultancy, Consulting fees: Sanofi; Research grant / Funding (institution), Peer reviewed trial funding: Canadian Cancer Trials Group. H. Payne: Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Paid lectures and advisory boards : Janssen; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Paid lectures and advisory boards: Astellas; Advisory / Consultancy, Paid advisory boards: AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Paid lectures and advisory boards: Ferring; Advisory / Consultancy, Paid advisory boards: Ipsen. F. Saad: Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Astellas; Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Amgen; Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Janssen; Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Bayer; Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Sanofi; Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AstraZeneca. H. Lindberg: Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies: Astellas Pharma; Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies: Bayer; Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies: Janssen; Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies: Sanofi Aventis; Research grant / Funding (self): Roche. A. Zarkar: Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Support for attendance of a conference: Bayer; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Educational meeting presentation: Pfizer; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Chairing an educational meeting presentation: Janssen; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Educational meeting presentation: Astellas; Research grant / Funding (self), IST: Sanofi. M.K.B. Parmar: Research grant / Funding (institution), Unrestricted grant to contribute to another comparison of STAMPEDE which supports the protocol overall, plus relevant drug and distribution.: Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution), Unrestricted grant to contribute to another comparison of STAMPEDE which supports the protocol overall, plus relevant drug and distribution.: Clovis Oncology; Research grant / Funding (institution), Unrestricted grant to contribute to another comparison of STAMPEDE which supports the protocol overall, plus relevant drug and distribution.: Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution), Unrestricted grant to contribute to another comparison of STAMPEDE which supports the protocol overall, plus relevant drug and distribution.: Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution), Unrestricted grant to contribute to another comparison of STAMPEDE which supports the protocol overall, plus relevant drug and distribution.: Sanofi. M.R. Sydes: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Research Funding, Speaker Fees and Advisory Board Honoraria: Bayer; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Advisory Board Honoraria: AAA; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Speaker Fees: Janssen. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Contains fulltext : 169950.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Nevirapine is the only nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor currently available as a paediatric fixed-dose-combination tablet and is widely used in African children. Nonetheless, the number of investigations into pharmacokinetic determinants of virological suppression in African children is limited, and the predictive power of the current therapeutic range was never evaluated in this population, thereby limiting treatment optimization. METHODS: We analysed data from 322 African children (aged 0.3-13 years) treated with nevirapine, lamivudine, and either abacavir, stavudine, or zidovudine, and followed up to 144 weeks. Nevirapine trough concentration (Cmin) and other factors were tested for associations with viral load more than 100 copies/ml and transaminase increases more than grade 1 using proportional hazard and logistic models in 219 initially antiretroviral treatment (ART)-naive children. RESULTS: Pre-ART viral load, adherence, and nevirapine Cmin were associated with viral load nonsuppression [hazard ratio = 2.08 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.50-2.90, P < 0.001) for 10-fold higher pre-ART viral load, hazard ratio = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.68-0.90, P < 0.001) for 10% improvement in adherence, and hazard ratio = 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90-0.99, P = 0.014) for a 1 mg/l increase in nevirapine Cmin]. There were additional effects of pre-ART CD4 cell percentage and clinical site. The risk of virological nonsuppression decreased with increasing nevirapine Cmin, and there was no clear Cmin threshold predictive of virological nonsuppression. Transient transaminase elevations more than grade 1 were associated with high Cmin (>12.4 mg/l), hazard ratio = 5.18 (95% CI 1.95-13.80, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Treatment initiation at lower pre-ART viral load and higher pre-ART CD4 cell percentage, increased adherence, and maintaining average Cmin higher than current target could improve virological suppression of African children treated with nevirapine without increasing toxicity.

Contains fulltext : 89174.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Fixed-dose combination scored dispersible stavudine, lamivudine, and nevirapine minitablets (Triomune Baby and Junior; Cipla Ltd) are simpler and cheaper than liquid formulations and have correct dose ratios for human immunodeficiency virus-infected children. However, they cannot be used for dose escalation (DE) of nevirapine. METHODS: Children were randomized to initiate antiretroviral therapy with full-dose (FD) nevirapine (Triomune Baby or Junior in the morning and evening) versus DE (half-dose nevirapine for 14 days [Triomune in the morning and stavudine-lamivudine {Lamivir-S} in the evening], then FD), in accordance with World Health Organization weight-band dosing tables. The primary end point was nevirapine-related clinical or laboratory grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: In total, 211 children (median [interquartile range {IQR}] age, 5 [ 2-9 ] years; median [IQR] CD4 cell percentage, 13% [8%-18%]) were enrolled and followed up for a median (IQR) of 92 (68-116) weeks. There were 31 grade 3 or 4 AEs that were definitely/probably or uncertainly related to nevirapine in the FD group (18.0 per 100 child-years), compared with 29 in the DE group (16.5 per 100 child-years) (incidence rate ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.63–1.87; P = .74). All were asymptomatic; 11 versus 3 were single grade 3 or 4 elevations in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels, all of which resolved without a change in nevirapine dose or interruption. Thirteen (12%) FD versus 2 (2%) DE children had grade 1 (2 in FD) or grade 2 (11 in FD and 2 in DE) rashes. Three (2 in FD and 1 in DE) substituted efavirenz, 3 (FD) continued FD nevirapine, and 9 (8 in FD and 1 in DE) temporarily interrupted nevirapine, followed by successful DE. Predictors of nevirapine rash were older age (P = .003) and higher CD4 cell count for age (P = .03). Twenty-two children died (12 in FD and 10 in DE), 1 FD and 5 DE children at

Introduction A better understanding of pediatric antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence in sub-Saharan Africa is necessary to develop interventions to sustain high levels of adherence. Methodology/Principal Findings Adherence among 96 HIV-infected Zambian children (median age 6, interquartile range [IQR] 2,9) initiating fixed-dose combination ART was measured prospectively (median 23 months; IQR 20,26) with caregiver report, clinic and unannounced home-based pill counts, and medication event monitoring systems (MEMS). HIV-1 RNA was determined at 48 weeks. Child and caregiver characteristics, socio-demographic status, and treatment-related factors were assessed as predictors of adherence. Median adherence was 97.4% (IQR 96.1,98.4%) by visual analog scale, 94.8% (IQR 86,100%) by caregiver-reported last missed dose, 96.9% (IQR 94.5,98.2%) by clinic pill count, 93.4% (IQR 90.2,96.7%) by unannounced home-based pill count, and 94.8% (IQR 87.8,97.7%) by MEMS. At 48 weeks, 72.6% of children had HIV-1 RNA

SummaryBackgroundAngiogenesis is a validated clinical target in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Cediranib is an oral antiangiogenic vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1–3 inhibitor that has shown antitumour activity in recurrent ovarian cancer. We assessed efficacy and safety of cediranib in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy and as continued maintenance treatment in patients with first relapse of platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.MethodsIn this randomised, three-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer at 63 centres in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Spain, and the UK. Participants received up to six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy (once every 3 weeks) then entered a maintenance phase. Participants were randomly allocated (2:3:3), with five stratification factors and in alternating blocks, to receive placebo alongside chemotherapy and then placebo only maintenance (arm A; reference), cediranib 20 mg once-daily alongside chemotherapy then placebo only maintenance (arm B; concurrent), or cediranib 20 mg once-daily alongside chemotherapy then cediranib 20 mg once-daily maintenance (arm C; maintenance). Patients continued treatment to progression or excessive toxic effects. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival between arms A and C. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in all patients who received the allocated study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00532194; the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN68510403; and ANZ Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN1261000016003.FindingsWe randomly assigned 486 women between Nov 13, 2007, and Dec 23, 2011; results presented are for 456 patients randomly assigned subsequent to the 30mg safety phase. During a median of 19·5 months (IQR 14–26) follow-up, 113 (96%) of 118 women assigned to arm A and 141 (86%) of 164 assigned to arm C had disease progression. Median progression-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 10·4–11·7) in arm C and 8·7 months (7·7–9·4) in arm A (hazard ratio 0·56, 0·44–0·72, p

Studies with a follow-up of8 weeks have indicated immune-preserving effects of yogurt probiotic supplementation among HIV patients. To evaluate the impact of 25 weeks use of probiotics, a randomized, double blind, controlled study was undertaken on 65 women who were naïve to anti-retroviral treatment.Ten participants were excluded post-randomization due to non-eligibility. Thirty participants were assigned placebo, of whom 25 completed the study versus 19 of 25 completing the study in the probiotics group (p = 0.5). From baseline to 10 weeks follow-up, the CD4 count declined on average 3 CD4 cells/μl (95% Confidence Interval: -97; 91) with placebo versus an increase of 50 cells/μl (95% CI: -61; 162) with probiotics (p = 0.5). From baseline to 25 weeks, the CD4 count increased with 19 cells/μl (95% CI: -90; 129) in the placebo group versus 46 cells/μl (95% CI: -100; 192) with probiotics (p = 0.8). No differences in immune markers, diarrhea incidence or adverse events were observed.Lactobacillus GR-1 and RC-14 may be safely consumed at 2 x 10(9) CFU/day by moderately immune compromised HIV patients but this did not universally preserve immune-function.Women were randomized to receive oral capsules containing Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and Lactobacillus reuteri RC-14 (2 x 10(9) colony forming units) or placebo twice daily for 25 weeks. The CD4 count and immune markers (IgG, IgE, IFNγ and IL-10) were measured at baseline and during follow-up, the occurrence of diarrhea was reported daily.

5576Background: OS is considered the gold standard endpoint for controlled clinical trials but it requires extended follow-up (median OS > 40 months for first line therapy) and large sample sizes. ...

BackgroundMinority ethnic groups in the UK are reported to have a poor experience of mental health services, but comparative information is scarce.AimsTo examine ethnic differences in patients' experience of community mental health services.MethodTrusts providing mental health services in England conducted surveys in 2004 and 2005 of users of community mental health services. Multiple regression was used to examine ethnic differences in responses.ResultsAbout 27 000 patients responded to each of the surveys, of whom 10% were of minority ethnic origin. In the 2004 survey, age, living alone, detention and hospital admissions were stronger predictors of patient experience than ethnicity Self-reported mental health status had the strongest explanatory effect. In the 2005 survey, the main negative differences relative to the White British were for Asians.ConclusionsEthnicity had a smaller effect on patient experience than other variables. Relative to the White British, the Black group did not report negative experiences whereas the Asian group were most likely to respond negatively. However, there is a need for improvements in services for minority ethnic groups, including access to talking therapies and better recording of ethnicity.

Contains fulltext : 164754.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: WHO 2013 guidelines recommend universal treatment for HIV-infected children younger than 5 years. No paediatric trials have compared nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Africa, where most HIV-infected children live. We aimed to compare stavudine, zidovudine, or abacavir as dual or triple fixed-dose-combination paediatric tablets with lamivudine and nevirapine or efavirenz. METHODS: In this open-label, parallel-group, randomised trial (CHAPAS-3), we enrolled children from one centre in Zambia and three in Uganda who were previously untreated (ART naive) or on stavudine for more than 2 years with viral load less than 50 copies per mL (ART experienced). Computer-generated randomisation tables were incorporated securely within the database. The primary endpoint was grade 2-4 clinical or grade 3/4 laboratory adverse events. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry number, 69078957. FINDINGS: Between Nov 8, 2010, and Dec 28, 2011, 480 children were randomised: 156 to stavudine, 159 to zidovudine, and 165 to abacavir. After two were excluded due to randomisation error, 156 children were analysed in the stavudine group, 158 in the zidovudine group, and 164 in the abacavir group, and followed for median 2.3 years (5% lost to follow-up). 365 (76%) were ART naive (median age 2.6 years vs 6.2 years in ART experienced). 917 grade 2-4 clinical or grade 3/4 laboratory adverse events (835 clinical [634 grade 2]; 40 laboratory) occurred in 104 (67%) children on stavudine, 103 (65%) on zidovudine, and 105 (64%), on abacavir (p=0.63; zidovudine vs stavudine: hazard ratio [HR] 0.99 [95% CI 0.75-1.29]; abacavir vs stavudine: HR 0.88 [0.67-1.15]). At 48 weeks, 98 (85%), 81 (80%) and 95 (81%) ART-naive children in the stavudine, zidovudine, and abacavir groups, respectively, had viral load less than 400 copies per mL (p=0.58); most ART-experienced children maintained suppression (p=1.00). INTERPRETATION: All NRTIs had low toxicity and good clinical, immunological, and virological responses. Clinical and subclinical lipodystrophy was not noted in those younger than 5 years and anaemia was no more frequent with zidovudine than with the other drugs. Absence of hypersensitivity reactions, superior resistance profile and once-daily dosing favours abacavir for African children, supporting WHO 2013 guidelines. FUNDING: European Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership.

For both medical and social reasons, there is strong interest in promoting the use of the pedal cycle in Britain. First, regular cycling is beneficial to health; second, cycling is one of the most ecologically friendly modes of transportation.1,2 An important obstacle to wider use of bicycles, however, is public concern about safety3—especially the risk of death and disability from head injury. An increasing body of research suggests that the risk of serious head injury can be substantially lessened by use of a cycle helmet,4 and for the past decade cyclists have been urged to adopt this protective measure; yet rates of usage in Britain remain disappointingly poor.5 Thus, some authorities suggest that the British Government should follow several other countries and make the use of cycle helmets mandatory.6 In this paper, we consider the ethical and moral arguments for and against helmet legislation.