Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Eur Respir J ; 2024 Jun 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38843916

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The role of surgery in pleural mesothelioma remains controversial. It may be appropriate in highly selected patients as part of a multimodality treatment including chemotherapy. Recent years have seen a shift from extrapleural pleuropneumonectomy toward extended pleurectomy/decortication. The most optimal sequence of surgery and chemotherapy remains unknown. METHODS: EORTC-1205-LCG was a multi-centric, non-comparative phase 2 trial, 1:1 randomising between immediate (arm A) and deferred surgery (arm B), followed or preceded by chemotherapy. Eligible patients (ECOG 0-1) had treatment-naïve, borderline resectable T1-3 N0-1 M0 mesothelioma of any histology. Primary outcome was rate of success at 20 weeks, a composite endpoint containing (1) successfully completing both treatments within 20 weeks; (2) being alive with no signs of progressive disease; and (3) no residual grade 3-4 toxicity. Secondary endpoints were toxicity, OS, PFS, and process indicators of surgical quality. FINDINGS: 69 patients were included in this trial. 56 patients (81%) completed 3 cycles of chemotherapy and 58 patients (84%) underwent surgery. Of the 64 patients in the primary analysis, 21/30 patients in arm A (70.0%; 80% CI: 56.8-81.0) and 17/34 patients (50.0%; 80% CI: 37.8-62.2) in arm B reached the statistical endpoint for rate of success. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 10.8 [95% CI 8.5-17.2] and 27.1 months [95% CI 22.6-64.3] in arm A, and 8.0 [95% CI 7.2-21.9] and 33.8 months [95% CI 23.8-44.6] in arm B. Macroscopic complete resection was obtained in 82.8% of patients. 30- and 90-day mortality were both 1.7%. No new safety signals were found, but treatment-related morbidity was high. INTERPRETATION: EORTC 1205 did not succeed in selecting a preferred sequence of pre- or postoperative chemotherapy. Either procedure is feasible with a low mortality, albeit consistent morbidity. A shared informed decision between surgeon and patient remains essential.

2.
J Clin Oncol ; 42(12): 1350-1356, 2024 Apr 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38324744

RESUMO

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Osimertinib has been established as a standard of care for patients with common sensitizing EGFR-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) although the sequential approach (first-generation inhibitor gefitinib followed by osimertinib) has not been formally compared. The phase II APPLE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02856893) enrolled 156 treatment-naïve patients, and two treatment strategies were evaluated: osimertinib up front or the sequential treatment approach with gefitinib up front followed by osimertinib at the time of progression, either molecular progression (detection of plasma T790M resistance mutation) regardless of the radiologic status or just at the time of radiologic progression. Patients' characteristics were well balanced, except for the higher proportion of baseline brain metastases in the sequential approach (29% v 19%). Per protocol, 73% of patients switched to osimertinib in the sequential arm. Up-front treatment with osimertinib was associated with a lower risk of brain progression versus the sequential approach (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [90% CI, 0.34 to 0.86]), but a comparable overall survival was observed between both strategies (HR, 1.01 [90% CI, 0.61 to 1.68]), with the 18-month survival probability of 84% and 82.3%, respectively. The APPLE trial suggests that a sequential treatment approach is associated with more frequent progression in the brain but a similar survival in advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC.


Assuntos
Acrilamidas , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Indóis , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Pirimidinas , Humanos , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/tratamento farmacológico , Gefitinibe/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamento farmacológico , Receptores ErbB/genética , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/uso terapêutico , Mutação , Compostos de Anilina/uso terapêutico
3.
Eur Urol Oncol ; 2024 Jan 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38272747

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Darolutamide is an androgen receptor inhibitor that increases overall survival in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa). This phase 2 study assessed the efficacy and safety of darolutamide as monotherapy without ADT in patients with eugonadal testosterone levels. METHODS: This was a 24-wk, open-label, randomized study of patients with hormone-sensitive, histologically confirmed PCa requiring gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH); an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0/1; and life expectancy >1 yr. All patients received darolutamide 600 mg bid or a commercially available GnRH analog. The primary endpoint is a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, defined as a ≥80% decline at week 24 relative to baseline in the darolutamide study arm. The GnRH arm is used as an internal control. The secondary endpoints included changes in T levels, safety/tolerability, and quality of life. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 61 men enrolled, the median (range) age was 72 yr (53-86 yr); 42.6% of them had metastases. In the darolutamide arm, the evaluable population with available PSA values at baseline and week 24 consisted of 23 patients. Twenty-three (100%) evaluable darolutamide patients achieved a PSA decline of >80% at week 24 (primary endpoint), with a median (range) decrease of -99.1% (-91.9%, -100%). Serum T levels increased by a median (range) of 44.3 (5.7-144.0) at week 24, compared with baseline. In the darolutamide arm, 48.4% of men reported drug-related adverse events (AEs; mostly grade 1 or 2). The most frequent treatment-emergent AEs included gynecomastia (35.5%), fatigue (12.9%), hot flush (12.9%), and hypertension (12.9%). Health-related quality of life measures are descriptive, and GnRH arm results will be presented as an internal reference. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Darolutamide monotherapy was associated with a significant PSA response in nearly all men with hormone-naïve PCa. Testosterone-level changes and most common AEs (gynecomastia, fatigue, hypertension, and hot flush) were consistent with potent androgen receptor inhibition. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we report the first use of darolutamide, a novel antiandrogen, as monotherapy without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The study shows that darolutamide induce a profound suppression of prostate-specific antigen in all patients, with a safety profile different from that of ADT.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA