Swiss trial of decompressive craniectomy versus best medical treatment of spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage (SWITCH): an international, multicentre, randomised-controlled, two-arm, assessor-blinded trial.

RATIONALE: Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is beneficial in people with malignant middle cerebral artery infarction. Whether DC improves outcome in spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) is unknown. AIM: To determine whether DC without haematoma evacuation plus best medical treatment (BMT) in people with ICH decreases the risk of death or dependence at 6 months compared to BMT alone. METHODS AND DESIGN: SWITCH is an international, multicentre, randomised (1:1), two-arm, open-label, assessor-blinded trial. Key inclusion criteria are age ⩽75 years, stroke due to basal ganglia or thalamic ICH that may extend into cerebral lobes, ventricles or subarachnoid space, Glasgow coma scale of 8-13, NIHSS score of 10-30 and ICH volume of 30-100 mL. Randomisation must be performed <66 h after onset and DC <6 h after randomisation. Both groups will receive BMT. Participants randomised to the treatment group will receive DC of at least 12 cm in diameter according to institutional standards. SAMPLE SIZE: A sample of 300 participants randomised 1:1 to DC plus BMT versus BMT alone provides over 85% power at a two-sided alpha-level of 0.05 to detect a relative risk reduction of 33% using a chi-squared test. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the composite of death or dependence, defined as modified Rankin scale score 5-6 at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include death, functional status, quality of life and complications at 180 days and 12 months. DISCUSSION: SWITCH will inform physicians about the outcomes of DC plus BMT in people with spontaneous deep ICH, compared to BMT alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02258919.

A randomised, prospective and head-to-head comparison of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and [18F]PSMA-1007 for the detection of recurrent prostate cancer in PSMA-ligand PET/CT-Protocol design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: A number of radiopharmaceuticals are available for the detection of recurrent prostate cancer (rPC), but few comparative imaging trials have been performed comparing them. In particular, there are no prospective head-to-head comparisons of the recently introduced [18F]PSMA-1007 to the existing standard of care [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11. The purpose of this trial is to establish the non-inferiority of the new radiopharmaceutical in terms of the rate of PET-positive findings and to obtain an intra-individual comparison of accuracy and radiopharmaceutical kinetics. METHODS: In this cross-over trial we will randomise 100 individuals to receive either first a standard-of-care PET/CT using [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 followed by an additional [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT within 2 weeks, or vice-versa. Inclusion criteria include patients 18 years and older with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy, defined as two consecutive prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels > 0.2 ng/ml. Detection rate at the patient-based level is the primary end-point. Each scan will be interpreted by a panel of six independent and masked readers (three for [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and three for [18F]PSMA-1007) which consensus majority in cases of discrepancy. To confirm the PET-positivity rate at a patient based level, follow up at 6 months following the first scan will be performed to a composite standard of truth. Secondary endpoints shall include an intra-individual comparison of radiopharmaceutical-kinetics, per-region detection rate and positive predictive value. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomised prospective comparative imaging trial to compare the established [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 with [18F]PSMA-1007 and will determine whether the new radiopharmaceutical is non-inferior to the established standard-of-care in terms of patient-level detection rate. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with and approved by the regional ethics authority #2020-02903 (submitted 09.12.2020, approval 16.12.2021) and the regulatory authority SwissMedic 2020DR2103. Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT05079828 and additionally in a national language in the Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal (SNCTP).

Cohort profile: the South African HIV Cancer Match (SAM) Study, a national population-based cohort.

PURPOSE: The South African HIV Cancer Match (SAM) Study is a national cohort of people living with HIV (PLWH). It was created using probabilistic record linkages of routine laboratory records of PLWH retrieved by National Health Laboratory Services (NHLS) and cancer data from the National Cancer Registry. The SAM Study aims to assess the spectrum and risk of cancer in PLWH in the context of the evolving South African HIV epidemic. The SAM Study's overarching goal is to inform cancer prevention and control programmes in PLWH in the era of antiretroviral treatment in South Africa. PARTICIPANTS: PLWH (both adults and children) who accessed HIV care in public sector facilities and had HIV diagnostic or monitoring laboratory tests from NHLS. FINDINGS TO DATE: The SAM cohort currently includes 5 248 648 PLWH for the period 2004 to 2014; 69% of these are women. The median age at cohort entry was 33.0 years (IQR: 26.2-40.9). The overall cancer incidence in males and females was 235.9 (95% CI: 231.5 to 240.5) and 183.7 (181.2-186.2) per 100 000 person-years, respectively.Using data from the SAM Study, we examined national cancer incidence in PLWH and the association of different cancers with immunodeficiency. Cancers with the highest incidence rates were Kaposi sarcoma, cervix, breast, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and eye cancer. FUTURE PLANS: The SAM Study is a unique, evolving resource for research and surveillance of malignancies in PLWH. The SAM Study will be regularly updated. We plan to enrich the SAM Study through record linkages with other laboratory data within the NHLS (eg, tuberculosis, diabetes and lipid profile data), mortality data and socioeconomic data to facilitate comprehensive epidemiological research of comorbidities among PLWH.

Cervical Cancer Screening Cascade for women living with HIV: a cohort study from Zimbabwe.

Countries with high HIV prevalence, predominantly in sub-Sahahran Africa, have the highest cervical cancer rates globally. HIV care cascades successfully facilitated the scale-up of antiretroviral therapy. A cascade approach could similarly succeed to scale-up cervical cancer screening, supporting WHO's goal to eliminate cervical cancer. We defined a Cervical Cancer Screening Cascade for women living with HIV (WLHIV), evaluating the continuum of cervical cancer screening integrated into an HIV clinic in Zimbabwe. We included WLHIV aged ≥18 years enrolled at Newlands Clinic in Harare from June 2012-2017 and followed them until June 2018. We used a cascade approach to evaluate the full continuum of secondary prevention from screening to treatment of pre-cancer and follow-up. We report percentages, median time to reach cascade stages, and cumulative incidence at two years with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used univariable Cox proportional hazard regressions to calculate cause-specific hazard ratios with 95% CIs for factors associated with completing the cascade stages. We included 1624 WLHIV in the study. The cumulative incidence of cervical screening was 85.4% (95% CI 83.5-87.1) at two years. Among the 396 WLHIV who received screen-positive tests in the study, the cumulative incidence of treatment after a positive screening test was 79.5% (95% CI 75.1-83.2) at two years. The cumulative incidence of testing negative at re-screening after treatment was 36.1% (95% CI 31.2-40.7) at two years. Using a cascade approach to evaluate the full continuum of cervical cancer screening, we found less-than 80% of WLHIV received treatment after screen-positive tests and less-than 40% were screen-negative at follow-up. Interventions to improve linkage to treatment for screen-positive WLHIV and studies to understand the clinical significance of screen-positive tests at follow-up among WLHIV are needed. These gaps in the continuum of care must be addressed in order to prevent cervical cancer.

Treatment for gastrointestinal and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several available therapies for neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) have demonstrated efficacy in randomised controlled trials. However, translation of these results into improved care faces several challenges, as a direct comparison of the most pertinent therapies is incomplete. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of therapies for NETs, to guide clinical decision-making, and to provide estimates of relative efficiency of the different treatment options (including placebo) and rank the treatments according to their efficiency based on a network meta-analysis. SEARCH METHODS: We identified studies through systematic searches of the following bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (Ovid); and Embase from January 1947 to December 2020. In addition, we checked trial registries for ongoing or unpublished eligible trials and manually searched for abstracts from scientific and clinical meetings. SELECTION CRITERIA: We evaluated randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more therapies in people with NETs (primarily gastrointestinal and pancreatic). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data to a pre-designed data extraction form. Multi-arm studies were included in the network meta-analysis using the R-package netmeta. We separately analysed two different outcomes (disease control and progression-free survival) and two types of NET (gastrointestinal and pancreatic NET) in four network meta-analyses. A frequentist approach was used to compare the efficacy of therapies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 55 studies in 90 records in the qualitative analysis, reporting 39 primary RCTs and 16 subgroup analyses. We included 22 RCTs, with 4299 participants, that reported disease control and/or progression-free survival in the network meta-analysis. Precision-of-treatment estimates and estimated heterogeneity were limited, although the risk of bias was predominantly low. The network meta-analysis of progression-free survival found nine therapies for pancreatic NETs: everolimus (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.46]), interferon plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.14 to 0.80]), everolimus plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.57]), bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.89]), interferon (HR, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.94]), sunitinib (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.67]), everolimus plus bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.83]), surufatinib (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.76]), and somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.34 to 0.77]); and six therapies for gastrointestinal NETs: 177-Lu-DOTATATE plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.07 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.26]), everolimus plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.12 [95%CI, 0.03 to 0.54]), bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.94]), interferon plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.93]), surufatinib (HR, 0.33 [95%CI, 0.12 to 0.88]), and somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.76]), with higher efficacy than placebo. Besides everolimus for pancreatic NETs, the results suggested an overall superiority of combination therapies, including somatostatin analogues. The results indicate that NET therapies have a broad range of risk for adverse events and effects on quality of life, but these were reported inconsistently. Evidence from this network meta-analysis (and underlying RCTs) does not support any particular therapy (or combinations of therapies) with respect to patient-centred outcomes (e.g. overall survival and quality of life). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study suggest that a range of efficient therapies with different safety profiles is available for people with NETs.

Pilot Testing of a Nurse-Led Basic Symptom Self-management Support for Patients Receiving First-Line Systemic Outpatient Anticancer Treatment: A Cluster-Randomized Study (Symptom Navi Pilot Study).

BACKGROUND: The Symptom Navi Program (SNP) is a nurse-led intervention supporting basic symptom self-management for patients with any cancer diagnosis. The SNP has been accepted by patients and healthcare professionals alike. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to pilot the SNP and evaluate patient-reported symptom outcomes, nursing support for symptom management, and patient safety. METHODS: Using a cluster-randomized design, we randomized centers to the intervention (SNP) or control group (usual care). Adult patients starting first-line systemic cancer treatment were included. The primary outcome was the change in symptom interference with daily functions from treatment onset to 16 weeks. Secondary outcomes included changes in symptom severity, symptom burden, self-efficacy, and perceived symptom management support and patient safety. We used linear and logistic mixed-effects models to pilot-test differences in mean changes between groups. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03649984). RESULTS: Changes in symptom interference with daily functions did not differ (mean difference at 16 weeks: -0.50; 95% confidence interval, -1.38 to 0.38; P = 0.25) between SNP (3 centers, 49 patients) and control (5 centers, 85 patients) as for all other outcomes. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary findings did not indicate an effect of the SNP on patient-reported symptom outcomes, self-efficacy, or symptom management support. Inadequate power and SNP components (eg, insufficient training, low number of follow-up consultations) may be attributed to the lack of an observed effect. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The SNP training content and intervention procedures merit reconsideration.

Cold pain hypersensitivity predicts trajectories of pain and disability after low back surgery: a prospective cohort study.

Improving the ability to predict persistent pain after spine surgery would allow identification of patients at risk and guide treatment decisions. Quantitative sensory tests (QST) are measures of altered pain processes, but in our previous study, preoperative QST did not predict pain and disability at single time-points. Trajectory analysis accounts for time-dependent patterns. We hypothesized that QST predict trajectories of pain and disability during 1 year after low back surgery. We performed a trajectory analysis on the cohort of our previous study (n = 141). Baseline QST included electrical, pressure, heat, and cold stimulation of the low back and lower extremity, temporal summation, and conditioned pain modulation. Pain intensity and Oswestry Disability Index were measured before, and 2, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Bivariate trajectories for pain and disability were computed using group-based trajectory models. Multivariable regressions were used to identify QST as predictors of trajectory groups, with sociodemographic, psychological, and clinical characteristics as covariates. Cold pain hypersensitivity at the leg, not being married, and long pain duration independently predicted worse recovery (complete-to-incomplete, incomplete-to-no recovery). Cold pain hypersensitivity increased the odds for worse recovery by 3.8 (95% confidence intervals 1.8-8.0, P < 0.001) and 3.0 (1.3-7.0, P = 0.012) in the univariable and multivariable analyses, respectively. Trajectory analysis, but not analysis at single time-points, identified cold pain hypersensitivity as strong predictor of worse recovery, supporting altered pain processes as predisposing factor for persisting pain and disability, and a broader use of trajectory analysis. Assessment of cold pain sensitivity may be a clinically applicable, prognostic test.

Treatment sequence in patients with neuroendocrine tumours: a nationwide multicentre, observational analysis of the Swiss neuroendocrine tumour registry.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, several treatment modalities have proved to be effective in the treatment of neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). However, there is currently no consensus on the sequence in which these options are best used. METHODS: In this observational study, we analysed the treatment modalities and sequences of all patients included in the Swiss NeuroEndocrine Tumour registry (SwissNET). SwissNET is a national registry, which has prospectively included patients with a NET from all regions of Switzerland since 2008. RESULTS: The registry includes 1366 patients; 1063 had documented therapies after the main diagnosis and were included in the analysis. The median follow-up time was 1.86 years. The most common primary site was the small intestine (291 patients, 27%) followed by pancreas (254 patients, 24%), lung (172 patients, 16%) and appendix (163 patients, 15%). A total of 167 different therapy sequences were observed. In 708 (67%) patients, surgery was the only treatment. The sequence of surgery followed by chemotherapy was most frequently documented in poorly (G3) differentiated (24 patients, 60%) and pancreatic (15 patients, 34%) NETs. Tumours treated with surgery followed by biotherapy or followed by peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) were predominantly well-differentiated G1 NETs of the small intestine. In patients who were treated with either PRRT or systemic therapy (chemotherapy or molecular therapy) or both, PRRT was used more frequently than systemic therapy in patients with a small intestinal NET (35 patients, 62% vs 30, 54%), whereas the opposite held true in pancreatic (44 patients, 59% vs 56, 70%) and lung NETs (6 patients, 14% vs 40, 97%). If both chemotherapy and molecular therapy were used, chemotherapy was applied prior to molecular therapy in 13 of 19 (68%) patients with a pancreatic NET. CONCLUSION: Surgery represents the treatment of choice in most patients with a NET irrespective of tumour stage. In patients receiving additional treatment, an impressive variety of treatment sequences were documented. In small intestinal NETs, patients received PRRT more often than chemotherapy, whereas the opposite holds true for patients with pancreatic and lung NETs.

Cervical cancer risk in women living with HIV across four continents: A multicohort study.

We compared invasive cervical cancer (ICC) incidence rates in Europe, South Africa, Latin and North America among women living with HIV who initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) between 1996 and 2014. We analyzed cohort data from the International Epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) and the Collaboration of Observational HIV Epidemiological Research in Europe (COHERE) in EuroCoord. We used flexible parametric survival models to determine regional ICC rates and risk factors for incident ICC. We included 64,231 women from 45 countries. During 320,141 person-years (pys), 356 incident ICC cases were diagnosed (Europe 164, South Africa 156, North America 19 and Latin America 17). Raw ICC incidence rates per 100,000 pys were 447 in South Africa (95% confidence interval [CI]: 382-523), 136 in Latin America (95% CI: 85-219), 76 in North America (95% CI: 48-119) and 66 in Europe (95% CI: 57-77). Compared to European women ICC rates at 5 years after ART initiation were more than double in Latin America (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.43, 95% CI: 1.27-4.68) and 11 times higher in South Africa (aHR: 10.66, 95% CI: 6.73-16.88), but similar in North America (aHR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.37-1.71). Overall, ICC rates increased with age (>50 years vs. 16-30 years, aHR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.03-2.40) and lower CD4 cell counts at ART initiation (per 100 cell/µl decrease, aHR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.15-1.36). Improving access to early ART initiation and effective cervical cancer screening in women living with HIV should be key parts of global efforts to reduce cancer-related health inequities.

Which Cost Components Influence the Cost of Palliative Care in the Last Hospitalization? A Retrospective Analysis of Palliative Care Versus Usual Care at a Swiss University Hospital.

CONTEXT: Although the number of studies on the economic impact of palliative care (PC) is growing, the great majority report costs from North America. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of PC hospital cost components from the perspective of a European mixed funded health care system by identifying cost drivers of PC and quantifying their effect on hospital costs compared to usual care (UC). METHODS: We performed a retrospective, observational analysis examining cost data from the last hospitalization of patients who died at a large academic hospital in Switzerland comparing patients receiving PC vs. UC. RESULTS: Total hospital costs were similar in PC and UC with a mean difference of CHF -2777 [95% CI -12,713 to 8506, P = 0.60]. Average costs per day decreased by CHF -3224 [95% CI -3811 to -2631, P < 0.001] for PC patients with significant reduction of costs for diagnostic intervention and medication. Higher cost components for PC patients were catering, room, nursing, social counseling, and nonmedical therapists. In sensitivity analyses, when we restricted PC exposure to three days from admission, total costs and average costs per day were significantly lower for PC. CONCLUSION: Studies measuring the impact of PC on hospital costs should analyze various cost components beyond total costs to understand wanted and potentially unwanted cost-reducing effects. An international definition of a set of cost components, specific for cost-impact PC studies, may help avoid superficial and potentially dangerous cost discussions.

Implementation of the Symptom Navi © Programme for cancer patients in the Swiss outpatient setting: a study protocol for a cluster randomised pilot study (Symptom Navi© Pilot Study).

INTRODUCTION: Self-management interventions show promising results on symptom outcomes and self-management behaviours. The Symptom Navi© Programme (SN©P) is a nurse-led intervention supporting patients' symptom self-management during anticancer treatment. It consists of written patient information (Symptom Navi© Flyers (SN©Flyers)), semistructured consultations and a training manual for nurses. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This pilot study will evaluate the implementation of the SN©P based on the Reach Effectiveness-Adoption Implementation Maintenance framework at Swiss outpatient cancer centres. We will use a cluster-randomised design and randomise the nine participating centres to the intervention or usual care group. We expect to include 140 adult cancer patients receiving first-line systemic anticancer treatment. Trained nurses at the intervention clusters will provide at least two semistructured consultations with the involvement of SN©Flyers. Outcomes include patients' accrual and retention rates, patient-reported interference of symptoms with daily functions, symptom burden, perceived self-efficacy, quality of nursing care, nurse-reported facilitators and barriers of adopting the programme, nurses' fidelity of providing the intervention as intended, and patients' safety (patients timely reporting of severe symptoms). We will use validated questionnaires for patient-reported outcomes, focus group interviews with nurses and individual interviews with oncologists. Linear mixed models will be used to analyse patient-reported outcomes. Focus group and individual interviews will be analysed by thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Symptom Navi© Pilot Study has been reviewed and approved by Swiss Ethic Committee Bern (KEK-BE: 2017-00020). Results of the study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journal and at scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03649984; Pre-results.

Therapeutic Options for Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Multiple therapies are currently available for patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), yet many therapies have not been compared head-to-head within randomized clinical trials (RCTs). OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative safety and efficacy of therapies for NETs. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, trial registries, meeting abstracts, and reference lists from January 1, 1947, to March 2, 2018, were searched. Key search terms included neuroendocrine tumors, gastrointestinal neoplasms, therapy, and randomized controlled trial. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials comparing 2 or more therapies in patients with NETs (primarily gastrointestinal and pancreatic) were evaluated. Thirty RCTs met the selection criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Pairs of independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. A network meta-analysis with a frequentist approach was used to compare the efficacy of therapies; the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline was used. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Disease control, progression-free survival, overall survival, adverse events, and quality of life. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 30 relevant RCTs comprising 3895 patients (48.4% women) assigned to 22 different therapies for NETs. These therapies showed a broad range of risk for serious and nonserious adverse events. The network meta-analyses included 16 RCTs with predominantly a low risk of bias; nevertheless, precision-of-treatment estimates and estimated heterogeneity were limited. The network meta-analysis found 7 therapies for pancreatic NETs: everolimus (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35 [95% CI, 0.28-0.45]), everolimus plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.25-0.51]), everolimus plus bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.26-0.75]), interferon (HR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.16-0.83]), interferon plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.13-0.71]), somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.33-0.66]), and sunitinib (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.26-0.67]), and 5 therapies for gastrointestinal NETs: bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.05-0.99]), everolimus plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.11-0.90]), interferon plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.07-0.96]), Lu 177-dotatate plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.03-0.26], and somatostatin analogues (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.21-0.78]) with higher efficacy than placebo and suggests an overall superiority of combination therapies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings from this study suggest that a range of efficient therapies with different safety profiles is available for patients with NETs.

Magnetic resonance angiography in giant cell arteritis: results of a randomized controlled trial of tocilizumab in giant cell arteritis.

Objective: To analyse magnetic resonance angiographic (MRA) vessel wall signals from a randomized controlled trial of tocilizumab (TCZ) to treat GCA. Methods: Participants were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either TCZ + glucocorticoids (GCs) or placebo + GC infusions at 4-week intervals for 52 weeks. GCs were started at 1 mg/kg/day, then tapered to 0.1 mg/kg/day at week 12 and thereafter down to zero. Patients with initial positive MRA findings underwent control MRA at weeks 12 and 52. Vessel wall signals were scored from 0 (normal) to 3 (intense late enhancement). Outcomes were the number of patients with complete MRA remission at weeks 12 and 52, and changes in vasculitis score, vessel anatomy and atherosclerosis. Results: Of the 30 randomized participants, nine TCZ and two placebo patients had no vessel wall enhancement on initial MRA. At week 12, MRAs were performed in nine TCZ and four placebo patients (nine and three in clinical remission, respectively). Three (33%) TCZ patients showed normalization of vessel wall signals compared with one (25%) placebo patient. At week 52, there was additional MRA improvement in some TCZ patients, but one-third showed persistent or increased late vessel wall enhancement. There was no formation of aneurysms or stenosis and no increase in atherosclerosis. Conclusions: Although TCZ resulted in complete clinical and laboratory remission of GCA over 52 weeks, MRA signals in vessel walls normalized in only one-third of patients. Whether these signals are of prognostic importance remains to be determined.

Additional malignancies in patients with neuroendocrine tumours: analysis of the SwissNET registry.

PRINCIPLES: Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are believed to be associated with an increased risk for additional malignancies (AMs). We aimed to (1) assess the occurrence of AM in NEN patients (2) investigate the characteristics and temporal relationship of NEN patients with and without AM. METHODS: The SwissNET registry has prospectively documented patients with NEN since 2008, covering the entire area of Switzerland. Clinical characteristics, functionality, location and histology of NEN as well as survival of all consecutive patients were retrieved. The characteristics of the AM (location, histology, time point of diagnosis in relation to diagnosis of NEN) were extracted. RESULTS: Out of 934 patients, 193 patients (21%) presented with AMs. There was no statistically significant difference with regard to location, functionality and grading (G1-G3) between the NEN patients with and without AM. AMs were diagnosed synchronously (±3 months), before (>-3 months) and after (>+3 months) diagnosis of NEN in 82 (42%), 96 (50%) and 13 (7%) patients, respectively. Location of NEN correlated with the anatomical origin of the AM. Age- and gender- corrected survival was not significantly different between NEN patients with and without AM. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of AM in NEN is high. The comparable characteristics with regard to functionality and grading in the NEN cohorts with and without AM and the similar location of AM and NEN suggest a selection bias towards frequent imaging procedures in NEN patients with AM.