Simple versus Radical Hysterectomy in Women with Low-Risk Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective data suggest that the incidence of parametrial infiltration is low in patients with early-stage low-risk cervical cancer, which raises questions regarding the need for radical hysterectomy in these patients. However, data from large, randomized trials comparing outcomes of radical and simple hysterectomy are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing radical hysterectomy with simple hysterectomy including lymph-node assessment in patients with low-risk cervical cancer (lesions of ≤2 cm with limited stromal invasion). The primary outcome was cancer recurrence in the pelvic area (pelvic recurrence) at 3 years. The prespecified noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 4 percentage points. RESULTS: Among 700 patients who underwent randomization (350 in each group), the majority had tumors that were stage IB1 according to the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) criteria (91.7%), that had squamous-cell histologic features (61.7%), and that were grade 1 or 2 (59.3%). With a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, the incidence of pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 2.17% in the radical hysterectomy group and 2.52% in the simple hysterectomy group (an absolute difference of 0.35 percentage points; 90% confidence interval, -1.62 to 2.32). Results were similar in a per-protocol analysis. The incidence of urinary incontinence was lower in the simple hysterectomy group than in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (2.4% vs. 5.5%; P = 0.048) and beyond 4 weeks (4.7% vs. 11.0%; P = 0.003). The incidence of urinary retention in the simple hysterectomy group was also lower than that in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (0.6% vs. 11.0%; P<0.001) and beyond 4 weeks (0.6% vs. 9.9%; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with low-risk cervical cancer, simple hysterectomy was not inferior to radical hysterectomy with respect to the 3-year incidence of pelvic recurrence and was associated with a lower risk of urinary incontinence or retention. (Funded by the Canadian Cancer Society and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01658930.).

The association of health-care contact days with physical function and survival in CCTG/AGITG CO.17.

INTRODUCTION: Although contact days-days with health-care contact outside home-are increasingly adopted as a measure of time toxicity and treatment burden, they could also serve as a surrogate of treatment-related harm. We sought to assess the association between contact days and patient-reported outcomes and the prognostic ability of contact days. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of CO.17 that evaluated cetuximab vs supportive care in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. CO.17 collected European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 instrument data. We assessed the association between number of contact days in a window and changes in physical function and global health status and the association between number of contact days in the first 4 weeks with overall survival. RESULTS: There was a negative association between the number of contact days and change in physical function (per each additional contact day: at 4 weeks, 1.50-point decrease; 8 weeks, 1.06-point decrease; P < .0001 for both) but not with global health status. This negative association was seen in patients receiving cetuximab but not supportive care. More contact days in the first 4 weeks was associated with worse overall survival for all participants and patients receiving cetuximab (per each additional contact day: all participants, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 1.10; and cetuximab, adjusted HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.11; P < .0001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of a clinical trial, more contact days early in the course were associated with declines in physical function and worse survival in all participants and in participants receiving cancer-directed treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00079066.

PRECISE trial (Pain RElief Combination Intervention StratEgies): protocol for the clinical trial of a pregabalin-melatonin combination for fibromyalgia.

INTRODUCTION: Fibromyalgia is associated with chronic widespread pain and disturbed sleep. Multidisciplinary, multimodal management often includes pharmacotherapy; however, current drugs used to treat fibromyalgia provide meaningful benefit to only 30-60% of treated individuals. Combining two or more different drugs is common in clinical practice with the expectation of better efficacy, tolerability or both; however, further research is needed to identify which combinations actually provide added benefit. Thus, we are planning a clinical trial to evaluate melatonin (MLT)-pregabalin (PGB) combination in participants with fibromyalgia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a single-centre, double-blind, randomised, double-dummy, three-period, crossover trial comparing a MLT-PGB combination to each monotherapy in 54 adult participants satisfying the 2016 American College of Rheumatology criteria for fibromyalgia. Participants will receive maximally tolerated doses of MLT, PGB and MLT-PGB combination for 6 weeks. The primary outcome will be daily pain intensity (0-10); secondary outcomes will include the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, SF-36 survey, Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), adverse events and other measures. Analysis of the primary and secondary outcomes will involve a linear mixed model with sequence, period, treatment, the first-order carryover and baseline pain score as fixed effects and participant as a random effect to test whether there are any treatment differences among three treatments and to estimate the least square mean of the mean daily pain intensity for each treatment, adjusting for carryover as well as period effects (ie, stability of pain levels). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry, ISRCTN #18278231, has been granted ethical approval by the Queen's University Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (Queen's HSREB Protocol #6040998) and is currently under review for a Clinical Trial Application to Health Canada Natural and Non-prescription Health Products Directorate. All participants will provide written informed consent prior to trial participation. Following trial completion, results will be disseminated in one or more biomedical journal publications and presented at one or more scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial has been registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry, ISRCTN18278231.

Surgery versus no surgery in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer: final overall survival analysis of the SOC-1 randomized phase 3 trial.

Surgery for platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) is widely practiced but had contradictory survival outcomes in previous studies. In this multicenter, open-label, phase 3 trial, women with PSROC, and having had one previous therapy and no platinum-based chemotherapy (platinum-free interval) of 6 months or more, were randomly assigned to either the surgery group (182 patients) or the no-surgery group (control) (175 patients). Patients with resectable diseases were eligible according to the international model (iMODEL), combined with a positron emission tomography-computed tomography imaging. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were coprimary endpoints in hierarchical testing, and a significantly longer progression-free survival with surgery was previously reported. Final analysis of OS was planned at data maturity of 59%. Between 19 July 2012 and 3 June 2019, 357 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 82.5 months. Median OS was 58.1 months with surgery and 52.1 months for control (hazard ratio (HR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-1.05, P = 0.11). The predefined threshold for statistical significance was not met, but prespecified sensitivity analysis was performed. Overall, 61 of 175 (35%) patients in control had crossed over to surgery following subsequent relapse, and adjusted HR for death in the surgery group compared with control was 0.76, 95% CI 0.58-0.99. In subgroup analysis of relapse sites by imaging, median survival was not estimable in the surgery group and was 69.5 months in control in patients with <20 sites (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.46-1.03). Patients with a complete resection had the most favorable outcome, with a median OS of 73.0 months. Twenty-four of 182 (13.2%) patients remained relapse free and alive >60 months in the surgery group as compared with five of 175 (2.9%) patients in the control group. In patients with PSROC, surgery did not increase OS in the intention-to-treat population but resulted in a prolongation of survival following adjustment of crossover.ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01611766 .

Plasma versus Tissue Tumor Mutational Burden as Biomarkers of Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab Response in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the CO.26 Trial.

PURPOSE: Tissue-derived tumor mutation burden (TMB) of ≥10 mutations/Mb is a histology-agnostic biomarker for the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pembrolizumab. However, the dataset in which this was validated lacked colorectal cancers (CRC), and there is limited evidence for immunotherapy benefits in CRC using this threshold. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CO.26 was a randomized phase II study of 180 patients, comparing durvalumab and tremelimumab (D + T, n = 119 patients) versus best supportive care (BSC; n = 61 patients). ctDNA sequencing was available for 168 patients (n = 118 D + T; n = 50), of whom 165 had evaluable plasma TMB (pTMB). Tissue sequencing was available for 108 patients. Optimal thresholds for stratifying patients based on OS were determined using a minimal P value approach. This report includes the final OS analysis. RESULTS: Tissue TMB ≥10 mutations/Mb was not predictive of benefit from D + T compared with BSC in microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic CRC [HR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.28-1.80); P = 0.47]. No tissue TMB threshold could identify a high TMB group that benefited from ICI. By contrast, plasma TMB (pTMB) ≥28 mutations/Mb was predictive of benefit from D + T [HR, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.13-0.85); P = 0.022], as was clonal pTMB ≥10.6 mutations/Mb [HR, 0.10 (95% CI, 0.014-0.79); P = 0.029] and subclonal pTMB ≥25.9/Mb [HR, 0.20 (95% CI, 0.061-0.69); P = 0.010]. Higher pTMB was associated with length of time on cytotoxic agents (P = 0.021) and prior anti-EGFR exposure (P = 2.44 × 10-06). CONCLUSIONS: pTMB derived from either clonal or subclonal mutations may identify a group likely to benefit from immunotherapy, although validation is required. Tissue TMB provided no predictive utility for immunotherapy in this trial.

Transverse Colon Primary Tumor Location as a Biomarker in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of CCTG/AGITG CO.17 and CO.20 Randomized Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: Sidedness is prognostic and predictive of anti-EGFR efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Transverse colon has been historically excluded from several analyses of sidedness and the optimal division between left- and right-sided colorectal cancer is unclear. We investigated transverse colon primary tumor location as a biomarker in mCRC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Pooled analysis of CCTG/AGITG CO.17 and CO.20 trials of cetuximab in chemotherapy-refractory mCRC. Outcomes of patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type (WT) mCRC from CO.17 and KRAS WT mCRC from CO.20 were analyzed according to location. RESULTS: A total of 553 patients were analyzed, 32 (5.8%) with cancers from the transverse, 101 (18.3%) from right, and 420 from (75.9%) left colon. Transverse mCRC failed to reach significant benefit from cetuximab versus best supportive care (BSC) for overall survival [OS; median, 5.9 vs. 2.1 months; HR, 0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28-1.42; P=0.26] and progression-free survival (PFS; median, 1.8 vs. 1.3 months; HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.26-1.28; P=0.16). Analyzing exclusively patients randomized to cetuximab, right-sided and transverse had comparable outcomes for OS (median, 5.6 vs. 5.9 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50-1.34; P=0.43) and PFS (median, 1.9 vs. 1.8 months; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.49-1.26; P=0.31). Patients with left-sided mCRC had superior outcomes with cetuximab compared with transverse for OS (median, 9.7 vs. 5.9 months; HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.67; P=0.0002) and PFS (median, 3.8 vs. 1.8 months; HR, 0,49; 95% CI, 0.31-0.76; P=0.001). Location was not prognostic in patients treated with BSC alone. CONCLUSIONS: Transverse mCRC has comparable prognostic and predictive features with right-sided mCRC.