The Prognosis and Natural History of In-Transit Melanoma Metastases at a High-Volume Centre.

BACKGROUND: Patients with in-transit melanoma metastases (ITM) experience a diverse spectrum of clinical presentations and a highly variable disease course. There is no standardized treatment protocol for these patients due to the limited data comparing treatment modalities for ITM. This is the first study to describe the disease trajectory and natural history of a large cohort of patients with ITM. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients treated for ITM between 2004 and 2018 at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre was performed. Clinical and pathological characteristics for primary and in-transit episodes were analyzed for predictors of relapse-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and melanoma-specific survival. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients with 303 episodes of ITM were identified: 52 (48%) females, median age 70.1 years (range 35-92). The median RFS for all episodes was 5 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.2-5.7). Eighty-seven percent of episodes involving isolated in-transit lesions underwent surgical excision, compared with 17% involving more than five in-transit lesions. A trend was seen between a greater number of lesions and shorter RFS (p = 0.055). The median DMFS was 34.8 months (95% CI 22.8-51.6). Factors associated with shorter DMFS included primary tumor thickness (hazard ratio [HR] 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15; p = 0.026), site of primary tumor (p = 0.008), and BRAF mutation (HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.14-3.94; p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Locoregional relapse is common in patients with ITM regardless of treatment modality. Characteristics of the ITM may predict for RFS, while primary tumor characteristics remain important predictors of DMFS.

Comparison of the metabolic effects of ritonavir-boosted darunavir or atazanavir versus raltegravir, and the impact of ritonavir plasma exposure: ACTG 5257.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic effects following combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) vary by regimen type. Changes in metabolic effects were assessed following cART in the AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) A5257 study, and correlated with plasma ritonavir trough concentrations (C24). METHODS: Treatment-naive adult subjects were randomized to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or darunavir, or raltegravir-based cART. Changes in lipids and other metabolic outcomes over time were estimated. Differences between arms were estimated with 97.5% confidence intervals and compared using pairwise Student t tests. Associations between ritonavir C24 and lipid changes at week 48 were evaluated via linear regression. RESULTS: Analyses included 1797 subjects with baseline fasting data. Baseline lipid profiles and metabolic syndrome rates (approximately 21%) were similar across arms. Comparable increases occurred in total cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with the boosted protease inhibitors (PIs); each PI had greater increases relative to raltegravir (all P ≤ .001 at week 96). Metabolic syndrome incident rates by week 96 (approximately 22%) were not different across arms. Ritonavir C24 was not different by arm (P = .89) (median, 69 ng/mL and 74 ng/mL in the atazanavir and darunavir arms, respectively) and were not associated with changes in lipid measures (all P > .1). CONCLUSIONS: Raltegravir produced the most favorable lipid profile. Metabolic syndrome rates were high at baseline and increased to the same degree in all arms. Ritonavir C24 was not different in the PI arms and had no relationship with the modest but comparable increases in lipids observed with either atazanavir or darunavir. The long-term clinical significance of the lipid changes noted with the PIs relative to raltegravir deserves further evaluation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT 00811954.

Efficacy and tolerability of 3 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing antiretroviral regimens for treatment-naive volunteers infected with HIV-1: a randomized, controlled equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: Nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy is not suitable for all treatment-naive HIV-infected persons. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 3 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing initial antiretroviral regimens to show equivalence for virologic efficacy and tolerability. DESIGN: A phase 3, open-label study randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio with follow-up for at least 96 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00811954). SETTING: 57 sites in the United States and Puerto Rico. PATIENTS: Treatment-naive persons aged 18 years or older with HIV-1 RNA levels greater than 1000 copies/mL without resistance to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors or protease inhibitors. INTERVENTION: Atazanavir, 300 mg/d, with ritonavir, 100 mg/d; raltegravir, 400 mg twice daily; or darunavir, 800 mg/d, with ritonavir, 100 mg/d, plus combination emtricitabine, 200 mg/d, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, 300 mg/d. MEASUREMENTS: Virologic failure, defined as a confirmed HIV-1 RNA level greater than 1000 copies/mL at or after 16 weeks and before 24 weeks or greater than 200 copies/mL at or after 24 weeks, and tolerability failure, defined as discontinuation of atazanavir, raltegravir, or darunavir for toxicity. A secondary end point was a combination of virologic efficacy and tolerability. RESULTS: Among 1809 participants, all pairwise comparisons of incidence of virologic failure over 96 weeks showed equivalence within a margin of equivalence defined as -10% to 10%. Raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir were equivalent for tolerability, whereas ritonavir-boosted atazanavir resulted in a 12.7% and 9.2% higher incidence of tolerability discontinuation than raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir, respectively, primarily because of hyperbilirubinemia. For combined virologic efficacy and tolerability, ritonavir-boosted darunavir was superior to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir, and raltegravir was superior to both protease inhibitors. Antiretroviral resistance at the time of virologic failure was rare but more frequent with raltegravir. LIMITATION: The trial was open-label, and ritonavir was not provided. CONCLUSION: Over 2 years, all 3 regimens attained high and equivalent rates of virologic control. Tolerability of regimens containing raltegravir or ritonavir-boosted darunavir was superior to that of the ritonavir-boosted atazanavir regimen. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Postoperative Recovery Outcomes in Adult Scoliosis: A Prospective Multicenter Database With 5-Year Follow-Up.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospective, multi-institutional database. OBJECTIVES: To determine postoperative quality of life outcomes in scoliosis patients using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at defined time points. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal surgery provides significant improvement in both pain and disability in adults with scoliosis compared with conservative treatment; however, the postoperative timing of improvements in quality of life outcomes has not been studied. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of a prospective, multi-center database with 1,750 patients. All patients completed the ODI at first encounter and at 6 follow-ups (6 weeks, 6 months, and 1, 2, 3, and 5 years). The authors stratified by age, primary versus revision, staged surgery, anatomical region of surgery, complexity (osteotomy and levels), and complications (intraoperative and postoperative). RESULTS: At baseline and most follow-up visits, older patients, those with revision surgeries, and those who had an osteotomy had significantly higher ODI scores than did young patients, those with primary surgeries, and those who did not have an osteotomy. All stratified groups showed a significant ODI score decrease between 6 weeks' and 6 months' follow-up. However, most of the stratified group patients' outcomes remained unchanged throughout the postoperative recovery period from 1 to 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment has the potential to significantly improve the quality of life of patients with adult scoliosis. An understanding of the timing of improvement after surgery will improve both the counseling of surgical candidates and patient care pathways.