Optimizing disease progression assessment using blinded central independent review and comparing it with investigator assessment in the PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 trial: challenges and solutions.

OBJECTIVE: Progression-free survival is an established clinically meaningful endpoint in ovarian cancer trials, but it may be susceptible to bias; therefore, blinded independent centralized radiological review is often included in trial designs. We compared blinded independent centralized review and investigator-assessed progressive disease performance in the PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 trial examining niraparib monotherapy. METHODS: PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 was a randomized, double-blind phase 3 trial; patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer received niraparib or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] v1.1), determined by two independent radiologists, an arbiter if required, and by blinded central clinician review. Discordance rates between blinded independent centralized review and investigator assessment of progressive disease and non-progressive disease were routinely assessed. To optimize disease assessment, a training intervention was developed for blinded independent centralized radiological reviewers, and RECIST refresher training was provided for investigators. Discordance rates were determined post-intervention. RESULTS: There was a 39% discordance rate between blinded independent centralized review and investigator-assessed progressive disease/non-progressive disease in an initial patient subset (n=80); peritoneal carcinomatosis was the most common source of discordance. All reviewers underwent training, and as a result, changes were implemented, including removal of two original reviewers and identification of 10 best practices for reading imaging data. Post-hoc analysis indicated final discordance rates between blinded independent centralized review and investigator improved to 12% in the overall population. Median progression-free survival and hazard ratios were similar between blinded independent centralized review and investigators in the overall population and across subgroups. CONCLUSION: PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 highlights the need to optimize blinded independent centralized review and investigator concordance using early, specialized, ovarian-cancer-specific radiology training to maximize validity of outcome data.

Total pancreatectomy and islet cell autotransplantation: a 10-year update on outcomes and assessment of long-term durability.

BACKGROUND: Total pancreatectomy and islet cell autotransplantation (TPIAT) offers an effective, lasting solution for the management of chronic pancreatitis up to 5-years post-operatively. Our aim was to assess durability of TPIAT at 10-years. METHODS: Patients undergoing TPIAT for chronic pancreatitis eligible for 10-year follow-up were included. Primary outcomes, including endocrine function and narcotic requirements, were reported at 5-, 7.5-, and 10-years post-operatively. RESULTS: Of the 231 patients who underwent TPIAT, 142 met inclusion criteria. All patients underwent successful TPIAT with an average of 5680.3 islet equivalents per body weight. While insulin independence tended to decrease over time (25.7% vs. 16.0% vs. 10.9%, p = 0.11) with an increase in HbA1C (7.6% vs. 8.2% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.09), partial islet function persisted (64.9% vs. 68.0% vs. 67.4%, p = 0.93). Opioid independence was achieved and remained durable in the majority (73.3% vs. 72.2% vs. 75.5%, p = 0.93). Quality of life improvements persisted, with 85% reporting improvement from baseline at 10-years. Estimated median overall survival was 202.7 months. CONCLUSION: This study represents one of the largest series reporting on long-term outcomes after TPIAT, demonstrating excellent long-term pain control and durable improvements in quality of life. Islet cell function declines over time however stable glycemic control is maintained.