PRODIG (Prevention of new onset diabetes after transplantation by a short term treatment of Vildagliptin in the early renal post-transplant period) study: study protocol for a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Post-transplant diabetes is a frequent and serious complication of kidney transplantation. There is currently no treatment to prevent or delay the disease. Nevertheless, identification of risk factors make it possible to target a population at risk of developing de novo diabetes. We hypothesized that a short-term treatment with vildagliptin may prevent new onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) in high-risk patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. Patients undergoing first kidney transplantation will be included from ten French transplant centers. Included patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive either vildagliptin 100 or 50 mg/day (depending on glomerular filtration rate) during 2 months (the first dose being administered before entering the operating theatres) or placebo. Additional antidiabetic therapy could be administered according to glycemic control. The primary outcome is the proportion of diabetic patients 1 year after transplantation, defined as patients receiving a diabetic treatment, or having a fasting glucose above 7 mmol/l, and/or with an abnormal oral glucose tolerance test. Secondary outcomes include glycated hemoglobin, the occurrence of acute rejection, infection, graft loss and patient death at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after transplantation. Outcomes will be correlated to clinical and general characteristics of the patient, cardiovascular history, nephropathy, dialysis history, transplantation data, biological data, health-related quality of life, and the cost-effectiveness of prevention of diabetes with vildagliptin. DISCUSSION: We have scarce data on the pharmacological prevention of post-transplant diabetes. If our hypothesis is verified, our results will have a direct application in clinical practice and could limit diabetes-associated morbidity, reduce cardiovascular complications, increase quality of life of renal transplant patients, and consequently promote graft and patient survival. Our results may possibly serve for non-transplant patients carrying a high-risk of diabetes associated with other co-morbidities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02849899 . Registered on 8 February 2016.

How health-related quality of life assessment should be used in advanced colorectal cancer clinical trials.

Traditionally, the efficacy of cancer treatment in patients with advance or metastatic disease in clinical studies has been studied using overall survival and more recently tumor-based end points such as progression-free survival, measurements of response to treatment. However, these seem not to be the relevant clinical end points in current situation if such end points were no validated as surrogate of overall survival to demonstrate the clinical efficacy. Appropriate, meaningful, primary patient-oriented and patient-reported end points that adequately measure the effects of new therapeutic interventions are then crucial for the advancement of clinical research in metastatic colorectal cancer to complement the results of tumor-based end points. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is effectively an evaluation of quality of life and its relationship with health over time. HRQoL includes the patient report at least of the way a disease or its treatment affects its physical, emotional and social well-being. Over the past few years, several phase III trials in a variety of solid cancers have assessed the incremental value of HRQoL in addition to the traditional end points of tumor response and survival results. HRQoL could provide not only complementary clinical data to the primary outcomes, but also more precise predictive and prognostic value. This end point is useful for both clinicians and patients in order to achieve the dogma of precision medicine. The present article examines the use of HRQoL in phase III metastatic colorectal cancer clinical trials, outlines the importance of HRQoL assessment methods, analysis, and results presentation. Moreover, it discusses the relevance of including HRQoL as a primary/co-primary end point to support the progression-free survival results and to assess efficacy of treatment in the advanced disease setting.

Guidelines for time-to-event end point definitions in breast cancer trials: results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer trials)†.

BACKGROUND: Using surrogate end points for overall survival, such as disease-free survival, is increasingly common in randomized controlled trials. However, the definitions of several of these time-to-event (TTE) end points are imprecisely which limits interpretation and cross-trial comparisons. The estimation of treatment effects may be directly affected by the definitions of end points. The DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer trials) aims to provide recommendations for definitions of TTE end points. We report guidelines for randomized cancer clinical trials (RCTs) in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A literature review was carried out to identify TTE end points (primary or secondary) reported in publications of randomized trials or guidelines. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts proposed recommendations for the definitions of these end points based on a validated consensus method that formalize the degree of agreement among experts. RESULTS: Recommended guidelines for the definitions of TTE end points commonly used in RCTs for breast cancer are provided for non-metastatic and metastatic settings. CONCLUSION: The use of standardized definitions should facilitate comparisons of trial results and improve the quality of trial design and reporting. These guidelines could be of particular interest to those involved in the design, conducting, reporting, or assessment of RCT.

Guidelines for time-to-event end point definitions in sarcomas and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) trials: results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer trials)†.

BACKGROUND: The use of potential surrogate end points for overall survival, such as disease-free survival (DFS) or time-to-treatment failure (TTF) is increasingly common in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in cancer. However, the definition of time-to-event (TTE) end points is rarely precise and lacks uniformity across trials. End point definition can impact trial results by affecting estimation of treatment effect and statistical power. The DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End points in CANcer trials) aims to provide recommendations for definitions of TTE end points. We report guidelines for RCT in sarcomas and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). METHODS: We first carried out a literature review to identify TTE end points (primary or secondary) reported in publications of RCT. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts proposed recommendations for the definitions of these end points. Recommendations were developed through a validated consensus method formalizing the degree of agreement among experts. RESULTS: Recommended guidelines for the definition of TTE end points commonly used in RCT for sarcomas and GIST are provided for adjuvant and metastatic settings, including DFS, TTF, time to progression and others. CONCLUSION: Use of standardized definitions should facilitate comparison of trials' results, and improve the quality of trial design and reporting. These guidelines could be of particular interest to research scientists involved in the design, conduct, reporting or assessment of RCT such as investigators, statisticians, reviewers, editors or regulatory authorities.

International validation of the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 questionnaire for assessment of health-related quality of life elderly patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Older people represent the majority of cancer patients but their specific needs are often ignored in the development of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-ELD15 was developed to supplement the EORTC's core questionnaire, the QLQ-C30, for measuring HRQOL in patients aged >70 years in oncology studies. METHODS: Patients (n=518) from 10 countries completed the QLQ-C30, QLQ-ELD15 and a debriefing interview. Eighty two clinically stable patients repeated the questionnaires 1 week later (test-retest analysis) and 107 others, with an expected change in clinical status, repeated the questionnaires 3 months later (response to change analysis, RCA). RESULTS: Information from the debriefing interview, factor analysis and item response theory analysis resulted in the removal of one item (QLQ-ELD15QLQ-ELD14) and revision of the proposed scale structure to five scales (mobility, worries about others, future worries, maintaining purpose and illness burden) and two single items (joint stiffness and family support). Convergent validity was good. In known-group comparisons, the QLQ-ELD14 differentiated between patients with different disease stage, treatment intention, number of comorbidities, performance status and geriatric screening scores. Test-retest and RCA analyses were equivocal. CONCLUSION: The QLQ-ELD14 is a validated HRQOL questionnaire for cancer patients aged 70 years. Changes in elderly patients' self-reported HRQOL may be related to both cancer evolution and non-clinical events.

[Conducting a cost-effectiveness trial in oncology: justification and method]. / Pertinence et méthodes pour la conduite d'un essai de supériorité médico-économique en cancérologie.

The occurrence of scarce financial resources and the aim of an adequate allocation of available budgets for public community induce to conduct trials where primary endpoint could be a medico-economic criterion. In oncology, the emergent place of "stop and go" strategy and or the diminution of chemotherapy administration induce initially to demonstrate non-inferiority of these strategies for efficacy. Another underlying objective for these trials could be also to demonstrate the medico-economic superiority of these strategies. In this context, medico-economic trials using cost and efficacy composite endpoint as primary endpoint for therapeutical strategies comparison could be an interesting alternative of classical clinical trials using only an efficacy endpoint. Based on a review, the aim of this paper is to focus about design of medico-economic trials: objectives, methods and sample size calculations.

The influence of socio-economic and surveillance characteristics on breast cancer survival: a French population-based study.

Survival data on female invasive breast cancer with 9-year follow-up from five French cancer registries were analysed by logistic regression for prognostic factors of cancer stage. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to estimate and compare the overall survival probability at 5 and 7 years, and at the endpoint. The Cox regression model was used for multivariate analysis. County of residence, age group, occupational status, mammographic surveillance, gynaecological prevention consultations and the diagnosis mammography, whether within a screening framework or not, were independent prognostic factors of survival. Moreover, for the same age group, and only for cancers T2 and/or N+ (whether 1, 2 or 3) and M0, the prognosis was significantly better when the diagnosis mammography was done within the framework of screening. Socio-economic and surveillance characteristics are independent prognostic factors of both breast cancer stage at diagnosis and of survival. Screening mammography is an independent prognostic factor of survival.