5 results on '"Jenny Seligman"'
Search Results
2. Molecular selection of therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: the FOCUS4 molecularly stratified RCT
- Author
-
Louise C Brown, David Fisher, Richard Adams, Jenny Seligmann, Matthew Seymour, Richard Kaplan, Susan D Richman, Philip Quirke, Rachel Butler, Helen Roberts, Janet Graham, Richard H Wilson, and Timothy S Maughan
- Subjects
metastatic colorectal cancer ,stratified ,randomised clinical trial ,platform trial ,multi-arm ,multi-stage ,adaptive trial ,umbrella trial ,biomarker ,braf ,tp53 ,ras ,pik3ca ,wee1 ,aspirin ,adavosertib ,her 1,2,3 ,capecitabine ,treatment break ,maintenance ,chemotherapy ,Medicine - Abstract
Background: Complex trials with innovative designs are becoming increasingly common and offer the potential to improve patient outcomes in a shorter time frame. There is evidence that patients with colorectal cancer fall into different subgroups with varying responsiveness to therapy, and that this variation is linked to genetic biomarkers. To the best of our knowledge, FOCUS4 was the first molecularly stratified trial in metastatic colorectal cancer and remains one of the first umbrella trial designs to be launched globally. Objectives: To identify novel therapies that improve disease control within the molecular subgroup of metastatic colorectal cancer in which the novel therapies were expected to be most effective. Design: This was a Phase II/III molecularly stratified umbrella trial that used adaptive statistical methodology to decide which subtrial should close early; new subtrials were added as protocol amendments. Setting: The maintenance setting following 16 weeks of first-line combination chemotherapy. Participants: Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic colorectal cancer were registered, and central laboratory testing was used to stratify their tumour into molecular subtypes. Following 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding disease were eligible for randomisation into either a molecularly stratified subtrial or the non-stratified FOCUS4-N trial. Interventions: Of the 20 drug combinations that were explored for inclusion in the platform trial, three molecularly targeted subtrials were activated: FOCUS4-B (PIK3CA mutation or PTEN overexpression) – aspirin versus placebo; FOCUS4-C (TP53 and RAS mutation) – adavosertib (AstraZeneca Ltd, Cambridge, UK) versus active monitoring; and FOCUS4-D (BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wild type) – AZD8931 versus placebo. A non-stratified subtrial was also carried out: FOCUS4-N – capecitabine versus active monitoring. Main outcome measures: The main outcome measure was progression-free survival from the time of randomisation to progression, comparing the intervention with active monitoring/placebo. Toxicity and overall survival data were collected in all randomised patients, and quality of life (using EuroQol-5 Dimensions) data were collected in FOCUS4-N only. Results: Between January 2014 and October 2020, 1434 patients were registered from 88 hospitals in the UK. Successful biomarker testing was completed in 1291 out of 1382 samples (93%), and 908 out of 1315 patients (69%) completing 16 weeks of first-line therapy were eligible for randomisation, with 361 randomly allocated to a subtrial. FOCUS4-B evaluated aspirin versus placebo in the PIK3CA-mutant/PTEN-loss subgroup, but recruited only six patients, so was closed for futility. FOCUS4-C evaluated adavosertib versus active monitoring in 67 patients in the RAS + TP53 double-mutant subgroup and met its primary end point, showing an improvement in progression-free survival (median 3.61 vs. 1.87 months; hazard ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.68; p = 0022). FOCUS4-D evaluated AZD8931 in 32 patients in the BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wild-type subgroup and showed no benefit, so was discontinued after the first interim analysis. FOCUS4-N evaluated capecitabine monotherapy versus active monitoring in 254 patients and met its primary end point, showing improvement in progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.75; p
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Evaluation of miR 31 3p as a biomarker of prognosis and panitumumab benefit in RAS-wt advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC): Analysis of patients (pts) from the PICCOLO trial
- Author
-
Dewi Vernerey, Raphaële Thiébaut, Francois Liebaert, Sophie Paget-Bailly, Karine Fontaine, Franck Bonnetain, Virginie Decaulne, Francis Rousseau, Celine Vazart, Faye Elliott, Philip Quirke, Susan D. Richman, Matthew T. Seymour, Jenny Seligman, and Pierre Laurent-Puig
- Subjects
Oncology ,Cancer Research ,medicine.medical_specialty ,business.industry ,Bioinformatics ,medicine.disease_cause ,mir-31 ,Advanced colorectal cancer ,Internal medicine ,medicine ,Biomarker (medicine) ,Panitumumab ,KRAS ,business ,medicine.drug - Abstract
3547 Background: miR 31 3p expression has previously shown correlation with outcomes in KRAS wild-type (wt) aCRC patients receiving EGFR-targeted therapy. We have therefore evaluated miR 31 3p in a...
- Published
- 2015
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. A Phase II trial of Higher RadiOtherapy Dose In The Eradication of early rectal cancer (APHRODITE): protocol for a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial
- Author
-
Nicholas West, Sarah Brown, Alexandra Smith, Mark Saunders, Amanda Webster, David Sebag-Montefiore, Mark Teo, Simon Gollins, Jenny Seligmann, Simon P Bach, Monica Jefford, Alexandra Gilbert, Eleanor M Hudson, Samantha Noutch, Ravi Adapala, Carole Burnett, Alwyn Burrage, Maria Hawkins, Debra Howard, Rohit Kochhar, Edward JD Webb, and Ane L Appelt
- Subjects
Medicine - Abstract
Introduction The standard of care for patients with localised rectal cancer is radical surgery, often combined with preoperative neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. While oncologically effective, this treatment strategy is associated with operative mortality risks, significant morbidity and stoma formation. An alternative approach is chemoradiotherapy to try to achieve a sustained clinical complete response (cCR). This non-surgical management can be attractive, particularly for patients at high risk of surgical complications. Modern radiotherapy techniques allow increased treatment conformality, enabling increased radiation dose to the tumour while reducing dose to normal tissue. The objective of this trial is to assess if radiotherapy dose escalation increases the cCR rate, with acceptable toxicity, for treatment of patients with early rectal cancer unsuitable for radical surgery.Methods and analysis APHRODITE (A Phase II trial of Higher RadiOtherapy Dose In The Eradication of early rectal cancer) is a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled phase II trial aiming to recruit 104 participants from 10 to 12 UK sites. Participants will be allocated with a 2:1 ratio of intervention:control. The intervention is escalated dose radiotherapy (62 Gy to primary tumour, 50.4 Gy to surrounding mesorectum in 28 fractions) using simultaneous integrated boost. The control arm will receive 50.4 Gy to the primary tumour and surrounding mesorectum. Both arms will use intensity-modulated radiotherapy and daily image guidance, combined with concurrent chemotherapy (capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin or omitted). The primary endpoint is the proportion of participants with cCR at 6 months after start of treatment. Secondary outcomes include early and late toxicities, time to stoma formation, overall survival and patient-reported outcomes (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) questionnaire).Ethics and dissemination The trial obtained ethical approval from North West Greater Manchester East Research Ethics Committee (reference number 19/NW/0565) and is funded by Yorkshire Cancer Research. The final trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and adhere to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines.Trial registration number ISRCTN16158514.
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Three, two, or one drug chemotherapy for frail or elderly patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer (321GO): A feasibility study
- Author
-
Peter S. Hall, Simon Lord, Michelle Collinson, Helen Marshall, Marc Jones, Catherine Olivier, Helen Howard, Jenny Seligman, Daniel Swinson, Rajarshi Roy, Jo Dent, Sue Cheeseman, Kim William Last, and Matthew T. Seymour
- Subjects
Oncology ,Cancer Research ,Chemotherapy ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Performance status ,Colorectal cancer ,business.industry ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Cancer ,medicine.disease ,Oxaliplatin ,Capecitabine ,Quality of life ,Internal medicine ,medicine ,business ,medicine.drug ,Epirubicin - Abstract
97 Background: The median age of death from gastroesophageal (GO) cancer is 77 years. Palliative chemotherapy can improve survival and quality of life. Current standard combination regimens have been developed in trials involving patients of median age under 65 years with predominantly good performance status (PS). In light of audit and survey evidence of widespread use of arbitrarily modified chemotherapy schedules in frail and elderly patients, better evidence is needed to guide treatment. Based on our experience with the MRC FOCUS trial in colorectal cancer, 321GO aimed to test the feasibility of a randomised trial comparing chemotherapy in frail and elderly patients with advanced GO cancer. Methods: Patients with advanced GO cancer considered unfit for full-dose 3-drug chemotherapy, were randomly allocated (1:1:1) to 3, 2 or 1 drug chemotherapy at 80% dose of standard regimens with EOX: epirubicin 40mg/m2 d1, oxaliplatin 104mg/m2 d1, capecitabine 500mg/m2 bd x21d, OX: oxaliplatin 104mg/m2 d1, capecitabine 500mg/m2 bd x21d or X: capecitabine 1000mg/m2 bd d1-14, then 7 day rest. The primary endpoint for feasibility required 45 patients to be recruited over 18 months. Secondary endpoints included tolerability, treatment benefit and compliance with detailed health and quality of life (QoL) assessment. Results: 55 patients were recruited over an average of 18 months for each of the six recruiting centres; 17 to EOX, 19 to OX and 18 to X. The median age was 75. 37 (66%) patients were of WHO PS 0 or 1 and 18 (33%) were of PS 2. After 6-weeks, 12 (71%), 9 (47%) and 9 (50%) patients in the EOX, OX and X arms had experienced a treatment delay, dose reduction, grade 3 toxicity or stopped treatment. Treatment benefit (no radiological progression or clinical deterioration) at 12 weeks was seen in 8 (47%), 11 (58%) and 3 (16%) patients for EOX, OX and X respectively. Compliance with baseline health and QoL assessment was 98% at baseline and 69% at 12 weeks. Conclusions: A phase III trial randomising frail or elderly patients with advanced GO cancer to alternative chemotherapy regimens is feasible. EOX was associated with greater toxicity compared with OX; X offered no improvement in tolerability over OX.
- Published
- 2012
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.