The impact of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents administration concomitantly with adjuvant anti-HER2 treatments on the outcomes of patients with early breast cancer: a sub-analysis of the ALTTO study.

PURPOSE: To assess whether erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) administration impacts the outcomes of patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC). METHODS: ALTTO (NCT00490139) patients were categorized by ESA use during adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment. Disease-free-survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and time-to-distant recurrence (TTDR) were analyzed by ESA administration, with subgroup analyses according to prognostic factors. Log-rank tests and Cox modeling were performed. Adverse events (AEs) of ESA-interest were compared. RESULTS: Among 8381 patients recruited in ALTTO, 123 (1.5%) received ESA concomitantly with study treatment. The median age of patients receiving ESA was 54 years, 39.0% premenopausal, most had tumor size > 2 cm (56.9%), node-positive (58.5%), and positive estrogen receptor expression (61.8%). Median follow-up was shorter in the ESA group [6.1 years (IQR 5.3-7.0) vs. 6.9 years (6.0-7.1); p < 0.001]. There was no DFS difference by ESA administration (log-rank p = 0.70), with 3- and 7-year DFS of 89.2% (95% CI 81.8-93.8%) and 81.6% (71.4-88.5%) in ESA group vs. 88.3% (87.6-89.0%) and 80.0% (79.1-80.9%) in No-ESA group. In subgroup analyses, the interaction of ESA administration with menopausal status was statistically significant (unadjusted p = 0.024; stratified p = 0.033), favoring premenopausal women receiving ESA. We observed no significant association of ESA administration with OS (log-rank p = 0.57; 7-year OS in ESA 88.6% vs. 90.0% in non-ESA) or TTDR. ESA-interest AEs were experienced by eight (6.5%) patients receiving ESA and 417 (5.1%) in the No-ESA group (p = 0.41). CONCLUSION: ESA administration to patients receiving adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment for HER2-positive EBC was safe and not associated with a negative impact on survival outcomes.

Essential medicines list in national cancer control plans: a secondary analysis from a global study.

With the advent of innovative therapeutics for and the rising costs of cancer management, low-income and middle-income countries face increasing challenges to deliver effective and sustainable health care. Understanding of how countries are selecting and prioritising essential cancer interventions is poor, including in the formulation of policies for essential medicines. We did an in-depth subanalysis from a global dataset of national cancer control plans (NCCPs), aiming to identify possible determinants of inclusion of policies related to essential medicines in the NCCP. The results showed poor global comprehensiveness of NCCPs, and substantial deficits in policies for financial hardships due to cancer care, specifically for access to cancer medicines. Specification of budget allocations, policy of protection from catastrophic health expenditure, and national treatment guidelines in the NCCPs contributed to more consistent policies on essential cancer medicines. The bedrock to deliver effective cancer programmes resides in the assurance of comprehensive, consistent, and coherent policy formulation, to orient resource selection and health investments, ultimately delivering equitable health for all.

Outcomes of patients with small and node-negative HER2-positive early breast cancer treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and anti-HER2 therapy-a sub-analysis of the ALTTO study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with small node-negative HER2-positive breast cancer are commonly treated with paclitaxel and 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab. We performed a sub-analysis of the ALTTO trial to explore the long-term outcomes of patients with small node-negative tumours. METHODS: The ALTTO trial randomised 8381 patients with early HER2-positive BC treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (anthracycline/taxane- or taxane/carboplatin-based), to trastuzumab (T), lapatinib (L), their sequence (T → L) or their combination (L + T). Patients with tumours ≤3 cm and node-negative were included in this sub-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2821 patients were analysed (median follow-up of 7 years). The median age was 52 years, and most patients had tumours ≤2 cm (64.3%). The 7-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 88.1% (95% CI: 86.7-89.3%). DFS was similar for arms T, T + L and T⟶L and significantly lower for arm L (stratified log-rank P = 0.031). The 7-year overall survival rate was 95.9% (95% CI: [95.0-96.6%) and the 7-year time-to-distant recurrence was 93.4% (95% CI: 92.3-94.4%). CONCLUSION: With most patients treated with anthracycline-based regimens, ALTTO shows that patients with small tumours treated with trastuzumab and concomitant chemotherapy have excellent long-term outcomes, similar to those of the APT trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00490139.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Erlotinib versus Docetaxel in Patients with Advanced Squamous Cell Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Failing First-Line Platinum-Based Doublet Chemotherapy Stratified by VeriStrat Good versus VeriStrat Poor. The European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP) EMPHASIS-lung Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Docetaxel and erlotinib are registered second-line treatments for wild-type EGFR NSCLC. Previous studies suggested a predictive value of the VeriStrat test in second-line therapy of NSCLC, classifying patients as either VeriStrat good or VeriStrat poor. EMPHASIS-lung aimed at exploring this predictive effect in patients with squamous cell NSCLC. The trial closed prematurely because of low accrual and results from other trials. Our analysis includes an exploratory combined analysis with results from the PROSE trial. METHODS: EMPHASIS-lung was a randomized phase III multicenter trial exploring the differential effect of second-line erlotinib versus docetaxel on progression-free survival (PFS) in VeriStrat good versus VeriStrat poor patients with squamous cell NSCLC. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were randomized, with 72.5% categorized as VeriStrat good. Patient characteristics were balanced between VeriStrat status and treatment groups. The median PFS times with docetaxel and erlotinib treatment in the VeriStrat good cohort were 4.1 and 1.6 months, respectively, versus 1.9 and 2.1 months, respectively, in the VeriStrat poor cohort. The median overall survival (OS) times with docetaxel and erlotinib treatment in the VeriStrat good cohort were 7.8 and 8.4 months, respectively, and 4.4 and 5.2 months, respectively, in the VeriStrat poor cohort. An additional exploratory analysis was performed; in it, 47 patients from the squamous cell subgroup of PROSE were included in a combined analysis, contributing with 45 PFS and 41 OS events. CONCLUSIONS: The final analysis of EMPHASIS-lung did not show a differential effect on PFS for erlotinib versus docetaxel stratified by VeriStrat status. Similarly, in the combined analysis, no significant treatment by VeriStrat status interaction was observed (interaction p = 0.24 for PFS and 0.45 for OS, stratified by study).

Erlotinib and bevacizumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and activating EGFR mutations (BELIEF): an international, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib improves the outcomes of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) harbouring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. The coexistence of the T790M resistance mutation with another EGFR mutation in treatment-naive patients has been associated with a shorter progression-free survival to EGFR inhibition than in the absence of the T790M mutation. To test this hypothesis clinically, we developed a proof-of-concept study, in which patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC were treated with the combination of erlotinib and bevacizumab, stratified by the presence of the pretreatment T790M mutation. METHODS: BELIEF was an international, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial done at 29 centres in eight European countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had treatment-naive, pathologically confirmed stage IIIB or stage IV lung adenocarcinoma with a confirmed, activating EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation). Patients received oral erlotinib 150 mg per day and intravenous bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 21 days and were tested centrally for the pretreatment T790M resistance mutation with a peptide nucleic acid probe-based real-time PCR. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. The primary efficacy analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and was stratified into two parallel substudies according to the centrally confirmed pretreatment T790M mutation status of enrolled patients (T790M positive or negative). The safety analysis was done in all patients that have received at least one dose of trial treatment. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01562028. FINDINGS: Between June 11, 2012, and Oct 28, 2014, 109 patients were enrolled and included in the efficacy analysis. 37 patients were T790M mutation positive and 72 negative. The overall median progression-free survival was 13·2 months (95% CI 10·3-15·5), with a 12 month progression-free survival of 55% (95% CI 45-64). The primary endpoint was met only in substudy one (T790M-positive patients). In the T790M-positive group, median progression-free survival was 16·0 months (12·7 to not estimable), with a 12 month progression-free survival of 68% (50-81), whereas in the T790M-negative group, median progression-free survival was 10·5 months (9·4-14·2), with a 12 month progression-free survival of 48% (36-59). Of 106 patients included in the safety analysis, five had grade 4 adverse events (one acute coronary syndrome, one biliary tract infection, one other neoplasms, and two colonic perforations) and one died due to sepsis. INTERPRETATION: The BELIEF trial provides further evidence of benefit for the combined use of erlotinib and bevacizumab in patients with NSCLC harbouring activating EGFR mutations. FUNDING: European Thoracic Oncology Platform, Roche.

Statistical methods for the analysis of clinical trials data containing many zeros: An application in vaccine development.

In recent years, many vaccines have been developed for the prevention of a variety of diseases. Many of these vaccines, like the one for herpes zoster, are supposed to act in a multilevel way. Ideally, they completely prevent expression of the virus, but failing that they help to reduce the severity of the disease. A simple approach to analyze these data is the so-called burden-of-illness test. The method assigns a score, say W, equal to 0 for the uninfected and a post-infection outcome X > 0 for the infected individuals. One of the limitations of this test is the potential low power when the vaccine efficacy is close to 0. To overcome this limitation, we propose a Fisher adjusted test where we combine a statistic for infection with a statistic for post-infection outcome adjusted for selection bias. The advantages and disadvantages of different methods proposed in the literature are discussed. We compared the methods via simulations in herpes zoster, HIV, and malaria vaccine trial settings. In addition, we applied these methods to published data on HIV vaccine. The paper ends with some recommendations and conclusions.