High-Dose Isoniazid Lacks EARLY Bactericidal Activity against Isoniazid-resistant Tuberculosis Mediated by katG Mutations: A Randomized Phase II Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Observational studies suggest that high-dose isoniazid may be efficacious in treating multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. However, its activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M.tb) with katG mutations (which typically confer high-level resistance) is not established. Objectives: To characterize the early bactericidal activity (EBA) of high-dose isoniazid in patients with tuberculosis caused by katG-mutated M.tb. Methods: A5312 was a phase IIA randomized, open-label trial. Participants with tuberculosis caused by katG-mutated M.tb were randomized to receive 15 or 20 mg/kg isoniazid daily for 7 days. Daily sputum samples were collected for quantitative culture. Intensive pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on Day 6. Data were pooled across all A5312 participants for analysis (drug-sensitive, inhA-mutated, and katG-mutated M.tb). EBA was determined using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. Measurements and Main Results: Of 80 treated participants, 21 had katG-mutated M.tb. Isoniazid pharmacokinetics were best described by a two-compartment model with an effect of NAT2 acetylator phenotype on clearance. Model-derived maximum concentration and area under the concentration-time curve in the 15 and 20 mg/kg groups were 15.0 and 22.1 mg/L and 57.6 and 76.8 mg ⋅ h/L, respectively. Isoniazid bacterial kill was described using an effect compartment and a sigmoidal maximum efficacy relationship. Isoniazid potency against katG-mutated M.tb was approximately 10-fold lower than in inhA-mutated M.tb. The highest dose of 20 mg/kg did not demonstrate measurable EBA, except against a subset of slow NAT2 acetylators (who experienced the highest concentrations). There were no grade 3 or higher drug-related adverse events. Conclusions: This study found negligible bactericidal activity of high-dose isoniazid (15-20 mg/kg) in the majority of participants with tuberculosis caused by katG-mutated M.tb. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01936831).

Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of teverelix DP in patients with advanced prostate cancer: A multicenter, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Teverelix drug product (DP) is a novel injectable gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist. METHODS: An adaptive phase 2, open-label, multicenter trial was conducted in patients with advanced prostate cancer to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combined subcutaneous (SC) and intramuscular (IM) loading dose regimen of teverelix DP of 120 mg SC + 120 mg IM (Group 1; N = 9) or 180 mg SC + 180 mg IM (Group 2; N = 41) administered at a single visit, followed by 6-weekly SC maintenance doses of 120 mg (Group 1) or 180 mg (Group 2), up to Day 168. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving castration levels with serum testosterone <0.5 ng/mL at Day 28 with a target castration rate of 90%. Injection sites were inspected by the investigator at every visit and reactions (ISRs) were proactively recorded. RESULTS: The target castration rate was reached in Group 2 (97.5%) but not in Group 1 (62.5%). The castration rates were not maintained to Day 42 (Group 2: 82.5%; Group 1: 50.0%). Suppression of testosterone to castrate levels occurred rapidly (median time: 2 days for both groups). Suppression of testosterone, prostate-specific antigen, follicle-stimulating hormone, and luteinizing hormone was sustained throughout the treatment period, being more prominent with the higher dose. The adverse event (AE) profile was similar between groups. The most common AEs were injection-site induration (n = 40: 80.0%), injection-site erythema (n = 35: 70.0%), and hot flush (n = 21: 42.0%). Most ISRs were Grade 1. CONCLUSION: Overall, the teverelix DP doses were generally well-tolerated but did not adequately maintain castration levels.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab for patients with previously treated, advanced, triple-negative breast cancer: Results from the triple-negative breast cancer cohort of the phase 2 LEAP-005 Study.

BACKGROUND: Novel treatments are needed for patients with advanced, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) that progresses or recurs after first-line treatment with chemotherapy. The authors report results from the TNBC cohort of the multicohort, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 LEAP-005 study of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03797326). METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic or unresectable TNBC with disease progression after one or two lines of therapy. Patients received lenvatinib (20 mg daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks; up to 35 cycles). The primary end points were the objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and safety (adverse events graded by the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0). Duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary end points. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were enrolled. The objective response rate by investigator assessment was 23% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10%-41%). Overall, the objective response rate by blinded independent central review (BICR) was 32% (95% CI, 17%-51%); and, in patients who had programmed cell death ligand 1 combined positive scores ≥10 (n = 8) and <10 (n = 22), the objective response rate was 50% (95% CI, 16%-84%) and 27% (95% CI, 11%-50%), respectively. The median duration of response by BICR was 12.1 months (range, from 3.0+ to 37.9+ months). The median progression-free survival by BICR was 5.1 months (95% CI, 1.9-11.8 months) and the median overall survival was 11.4 months (95% CI, 4.1-21.7 months). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 94% of patients (grade 3, 52%; grade 4, 0%). One patient died due to a treatment-related adverse event of subarachnoid hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile in patients with previously treated, advanced TNBC.

Efficacy of adding levofloxacin to gemcitabine and nanoparticle-albumin-binding paclitaxel combination therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: study protocol for a multicenter, randomized phase 2 trial (T-CORE2201).

BACKGROUND: Advanced pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths. For patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, gemcitabine and nanoparticle albumin-binding paclitaxel (nabPTX) combination (GEM/nabPTX) therapy is one of the recommended first-line treatments. Several retrospective studies have suggested that the addition of levofloxacin improves the efficacy of GEM/nabPTX therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. This prospective study aims to evaluate whether the addition of antibiotics improves the treatment efficacy of GEM/nabPTX as a first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, randomized, phase 2 trial will included 140 patients. Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the GEM/nabPTX therapy group or the GEM/nabPTX plus levofloxacin group. The primary endpoint for the two groups is median progression-free survival time (mPFS) for the full analysis set (FAS). The secondary endpoints for the two groups are median overall survival (mOS), response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse event (AE) for the FAS and mPFS, mOS, RR, DCR, and AE for the per-protocol set. This study will enroll patients treated with GEM/nabPTX as the first-line chemotherapy for stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma. DISCUSSION: GEM/nabPTX is a standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Recently, the superiority of 5-fluorouracil, liposomal irinotecan, and oxaliplatin combination therapy (NALIRIFOX) to GEM/nabPTX as first-line therapy for pancreatic cancer has been reported. However, the efficacy of NALIRIFOX is inadequate. Based on previous retrospective studies, it is hypothesized that treatment efficacy will improve when levofloxacin is added to GEM/nabPTX therapy. If the AEs (such as leukopenia, neutropenia, and peripheral neuropathy) that occur at an increased rate with levofloxacin and GEM/nabPTX combination therapy can be carefully monitored and properly managed, this simple intervention can be expected to improve the prognosis of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT; registry number: jRCTs021230005).

The algorithm used for the calculation of gas exchange affects the estimation of O2 uptake kinetics at the onset of moderate-intensity exercise.

At the start of a moderate-intensity square-wave exercise, after a short delay, breath-by-breath O2 uptake at the mouth is approximated to a mono-exponential function, whose time constant is considered matched to that of the O2 uptake of the working muscles. We compared the kinetic parameters obtained from the breath-by-breath gas exchange data yielded by the 'Independent-breath' algorithm (IND), which accounts for the changes in lung gas stores, with those obtained with the classical 'Expiration-only' algorithm (EXP). The two algorithms were applied on the same flow and gas fraction traces acquired on 10 healthy volunteers, performing 10 times the same moderate-intensity exercise transition. Repeated O2 uptake responses were stacked together and the kinetic parameters of a mono-exponential function were estimated by non-linear regression, removing the data pertaining to 1-s progressively longer initial periods (ΔTr ). Independently of ΔTr , the mean response time (time constant + time delay) obtained for the IND data was faster compared to the EXP data (∼43 s vs. ∼47 s, P < 0.001), essentially because of shorter time delays. Between ΔTr  = 16 s and ΔTr  = 29s, the time constants of the IND data decreased (30.7 s vs. 28.0 s, P < 0.05; drop = 10%), but less than those of the EXP data (32.2 s vs. 26.2 s, P < 0.001; drop = 23%); with the same ΔTr , the time constants of the two algorithms' data were not different (P > 0.07). The different decrease in the time constant, together with the different mean response time, suggests that the data yielded by the two algorithms provide a different picture of the phenomena occurring at the beginning of the exercise.

Long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene transfer up to 6 years post-treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Valoctocogene roxaparvovec uses an adeno-associated virus serotype 5 (AAV5) vector to transfer a factor VIII (FVIII) coding sequence to individuals with severe haemophilia A, providing bleeding protection. AIM: To assess safety and efficacy of valoctocogene roxaparvovec 5-6 years post-treatment. METHODS: In a phase 1/2 trial, adult male participants with severe haemophilia A (FVIII ≤1 IU/dL) without FVIII inhibitors or anti-AAV5 antibodies received valoctocogene roxaparvovec and were followed for 6 (6 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 7) and 5 (4 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 6) years. Safety, including investigation of potential associations between a malignancy and gene therapy, and efficacy are reported. RESULTS: No new treatment-related safety signals emerged. During year 6, a participant in the 6 × 1013  vg/kg cohort was diagnosed with grade 2 parotid gland acinar cell carcinoma; definitive treatment was uncomplicated parotidectomy with lymph node dissection. Target enrichment sequencing of tumour and adjacent healthy tissue revealed low vector integration (8.25 × 10-5 per diploid cell). Integrations were not elevated in tumour samples, no insertions appeared to drive tumorigenesis, and no clonal expansion of integration-containing cells occurred. During all follow-ups, >90% decreases from baseline in annualised treated bleeds and FVIII infusion rates were maintained. At the end of years 6 and 5, mean FVIII activity (chromogenic assay) was 9.8 IU/dL (median, 5.6 IU/dL) and 7.6 IU/dL (median, 7.1 IU/dL) for the 6 × 1013 and 4 × 1013 vg/kg cohorts, respectively, representing proportionally smaller year-over-year declines than earlier timepoints. CONCLUSIONS: Valoctocogene roxaparvovec safety and efficacy profiles remain largely unchanged; genomic investigations showed no association with a parotid tumour.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab for patients with previously treated advanced ovarian cancer: Results from the phase 2 multicohort LEAP-005 study.

OBJECTIVES: The phase 2, multicohort, open-label LEAP-005 study evaluated lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors. We report outcomes from the ovarian cancer cohort. METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic/unresectable ovarian cancer and had received 3 previous lines of therapy. Patients received lenvatinib 20 mg/day plus pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. Treatment continued until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or (for pembrolizumab) completion of 35 cycles. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST version 1.1 and safety. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were enrolled. 39% had high grade serous ovarian cancer, 23% were platinum-sensitive, 55% were platinum-resistant, 23% were platinum-refractory, and 84% had tumors that had a PD-L1 combined positive (CPS) score ≥1. ORR (95% CI) was 26% (12%-45%) by investigator assessment and 35% (19%-55%) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Per BICR, median DOR was 9.2 (1.5+ to 37.8+) months. ORRs (95% CI) by BICR were 35% (9/26 patients; 17%-56%) for PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 disease and 50% (2/4 patients; 7%-93%) for PD-L1 CPS < 1 disease. Median (95% CI) PFS by BICR and OS were 6.2 (4.0-8.5) months and 21.3 (11.7-32.3) months, respectively. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 94% of patients (grade 3-4, 77%). One patient died from treatment-related hypovolemic shock. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity as fourth line therapy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, and no unanticipated safety signals were identified. Responses were observed regardless of PD-L1 status.

ADO09, a co-formulation of pramlintide and insulin A21G, lowers body weight versus insulin lispro in type 1 diabetes.

AIM: To study safety, efficacy and weight loss with ADO09, a co-formulation of insulin A21G and pramlintide, in type 1 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, two-arm ambulatory 16-week study compared ADO09 with insulin lispro in 80 participants with type 1 diabetes. We compared changes of weight, glycated haemoglobin, glycaemic patterns during continuous glucose monitoring, and insulin doses at baseline and at the end of treatment. RESULTS: A significant and continuing weight loss, the primary endpoint, was observed with ADO09 compared with lispro as prandial insulin. In the whole group, the weight loss with ADO09 relative to lispro was 2.1 kg. Glycaemic control was relatively good (7.7% mean glycated haemoglobin) in both groups and did not change during treatment. Prandial insulin doses were reduced by 21% in the ADO09 group, whereas basal insulin dosage was not modified. Gastrointestinal symptoms were more frequent with ADO09, but no clear difference in hypoglycaemia was observed. CONCLUSIONS: These results extend previous observations on the efficacy and safety of this insulin/pramlintide co-formulation. They show a beneficial effect on weight, using less mealtime insulin and without increased hypoglycaemia.

Seamless phase 2/3 design for trials with multiple co-primary endpoints using Bayesian predictive power.

Seamless phase 2/3 design has become increasingly popular in clinical trials with a single endpoint. Trials that define success based on the achievement of all co-primary endpoints (CPEs) encounter the challenge of inflated type 2 error rates, often leading to an overly large sample size. To tackle this challenge, we introduced a seamless phase 2/3 design strategy that employs Bayesian predictive power (BPP) for futility monitoring and sample size re-estimation at interim analysis. The correlations among multiple CPEs are incorporated using a Dirichlet-multinomial distribution. An alternative approach based on conditional power (CP) was also discussed for comparison. A seamless phase 2/3 vaccine trial employing four binary endpoints under the non-inferior hypothesis serves as an example. Our results spotlight that, in scenarios with relatively small phase 2 sample sizes (e.g., 50 or 100 subjects), the BPP approach either outperforms or matches the CP approach in terms of overall power. Particularly, with n1 = 50 and ρ = 0, BPP showcases an overall power advantage over CP by as much as 8.54%. Furthermore, when the phase 2 stage enrolled more subjects (e.g., 150 or 200), especially with a phase 2 sample size of 200 and ρ = 0, the BPP approach evidences a peak difference of 5.76% in early stop probability over the CP approach, emphasizing its better efficiency in terminating futile trials. It's noteworthy that both BPP and CP methodologies maintained type 1 error rates under 2.5%. In conclusion, the integration of the Dirichlet-Multinominal model with the BPP approach offers improvement in certain scenarios over the CP approach for seamless phase 2/3 trials with multiple CPEs.

Plain language summary of the FOENIX-CCA2 study: futibatinib for people with advanced bile duct cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the results from a phase 2 study called FOENIXCCA2. The study evaluated treatment with futibatinib in people with a rare form of advanced bile duct cancer called intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (or iCCA), where the tumors have changes in the structure of a gene called FGFR2. These changes include FGFR2 gene fusions. Bile duct cancer often returns after surgery or cannot be treated by surgery because the tumor has spread, so it requires treatment with chemotherapy. People live for a median of 1 year after their first chemotherapy treatment and 6 months after their second treatment. This study included people whose cancer had grown/spread after one or more chemotherapy treatments. The aims of the study were to see if futibatinib could shrink the size of tumors and stop the cancer from growing/spreading and to see how long people lived when treated with futibatinib. Clinicians also looked at side effects from taking futibatinib and at how it affected people's quality of life. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Futibatinib treatment shrank tumors in over 80% of people who received treatment. Tumors shrank by at least 30% in 42% of people. Futibatinib stopped tumors from growing/spreading for a median of 9.7 months. People who took the medicine lived for a median of 21.7 months, and 72% of people were still alive after 1 year. Side effects from taking futibatinib were like those reported for similar medicines, and clinicians considered the side effects to be manageable by adjusting the dose of futibatinib or treating the side effects. Most people reported that their quality of life stayed the same or improved during the first 9 months of taking futibatinib. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The results support the use of futibatinib for treating people with advanced bile duct cancer. Based on the results of this study, futibatinib is now approved in the US, Europe, and Japan. Futibatinib is approved for treating adults with advanced bile duct cancer who have received previous treatment for their cancer, and whose tumors have a gene fusion or other change in the FGFR2 gene.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02052778 (FOENIX-CCA2).