Long-Term Outcome of Time-Staged Gamma Knife Radiosurgery for Large Arteriovenous Malformations.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for large (> 10 mL) arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) remains highly challenging. This study evaluated long-term effect of time-staged gamma knife radiosurgery (GKS) for large AVMs. METHODS: For patients with large AVMs treated by time-staged GKS over 10 years, time-staged GKS was repeated every three years targeting the entire nidus if total obliteration was not achieved. Obliteration rate and post-GKS complications were assessed based on 10 mL volume interval of AVMs. Prognostic factors for these outcomes were evaluated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were analyzed. For AVMs in the 10-20 mL subgroup, a dose ≥ 13.5Gy yielded higher obliteration rate in the first GKS. In the 20-30 mL subgroup, a second GKS significantly boosted obliteration. AVMs > 30 mL did not achieve any obliteration with the first GKS. Among 35 (36.4%) cases lost to follow-up, 7 (7.2%) were lost due to GKS complications. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that each subgroup needed different time for achieving 50% favorable obliteration outcome rate: 3.5, 6.5, and 8.2 years for 10-20 mL, 20-30 mL, and > 30 mL subgroup, respectively. Total obliteration rate calculated by intention-to-treat method: 73%, 51.7%, 35.7%, respectively, 61.5% overall. Post-GKS hemorrhage and chronic encapsulated expanding hematoma (CEEH) occurred in 13.5% and 8.3% of cases, respectively. Two patients died. Dose and volume were significant prognostic factors for obliteration. Initial AVM volume was a significant prognostic factor of post-GKS hemorrhage and CEEH. CONCLUSION: Time-staged GKS for large AVMs less than 30 mL has highly favorable long-term outcome and a tolerable complication rate.

9 months of delamanid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and pyrazinamide versus conventional therapy for treatment of fluoroquinolone-sensitive multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-END): a multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 2/3 non-inferiority trial in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: With the introduction of new anti-tuberculosis drugs, all-oral regimens with shorter treatment durations for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis have been anticipated. We aimed to investigate whether a new all-oral regimen was non-inferior to the conventional regimen including second-line anti-tuberculosis drugs for 20-24 months in the treatment of fluoroquinolone-sensitive multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 2/3 non-inferiority trial, we enrolled men and women aged 19-85 years with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis confirmed by phenotypic or genotypic drug susceptibility tests or rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis by genotypic tests at 12 participating hospitals throughout South Korea. Participants with fluoroquinolone-resistant multidrug-resistant tuberculosis were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to two groups using a block randomisation, stratified by the presence of diabetes and cavitation on baseline chest radiographs. The investigational group received delamanid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and pyrazinamide for 9 months, and the control group received a conventional 20-24-month regimen, according to the 2014 WHO guidelines. The primary outcome was the treatment success rate at 24 months after treatment initiation in the modified intention-to-treat population and the per-protocol population. Participants who were "cured" and "treatment completed" were defined as treatment success following the 2014 WHO guidelines. Non-inferiority was confirmed if the lower limit of a 97·5% one-sided CI of the difference between the groups was greater than -10%. Safety data were collected for 24 months in participants who received a predefined regimen at least once. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02619994. FINDINGS: Between March 4, 2016, and Sept 14, 2019, 214 participants were enrolled, 168 (78·5%) of whom were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. At 24 months after treatment initiation, 60 (70·6%) of 85 participants in the control group had treatment success, as did 54 (75·0%) of 72 participants in the shorter-regimen group (between-group difference 4·4% [97·5% one-sided CI -9·5% to ∞]), satisfying the predefined non-inferiority margin. No difference in safety outcomes was identified between the control group and the shorter-regimen group. INTERPRETATION: 9-month treatment with oral delamanid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and pyrazinamide could represent a new treatment option for participants with fluoroquinolone-sensitive multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. FUNDING: Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, South Korea.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Fibrin Glue to Prevent Bleeding After Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the efficacy of fibrin glue for preventing postendoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) bleeding in high-risk patients for bleeding (expected iatrogenic ulcer size ≥40 mm or receiving antithrombotic therapy). METHODS: A multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial was performed at 4 tertiary medical centers in South Korea between July 1, 2020, and June 22, 2022. Patients with gastric neoplasm and a high risk of post-ESD bleeding were enrolled and allocated at 1:1 to a control group (standard ESD) or a fibrin glue group (fibrin glue applied to iatrogenic ulcers after standard ESD). The primary outcome was overall bleeding events within 4 weeks. The secondary outcomes were acute bleeding (within 48 hours post-ESD) and delayed bleeding (48 hours to 4 weeks post-ESD). RESULTS: In total, 254 patients were randomized, and 247 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (125 patients in the fibrin glue group and 122 patients in the control group). Overall bleeding events occurred in 12.0% (15/125) of the fibrin glue group and 13.1% (16/122) of the control group ( P = 0.791). Acute bleeding events were significantly less common in the fibrin glue group than in the control group (1/125 vs 7/122, P = 0.034). Delayed bleeding events occurred in 11.2% (14/125) in the fibrin glue group and 7.3% (9/122) in the control group ( P = 0.301). DISCUSSION: This trial failed to show a preventive effect of fibrin glue on overall post-ESD bleeding in high-risk patients. However, the secondary outcomes suggest a potential sealing effect of fibrin glue during the acute period.

A time-dependent subdistribution hazard model for major dental treatment events in cancer patients: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Dental care in cancer patients tends to be less prioritized. However, limited research has focused on major dental treatment events in cancer patients after the diagnosis. This study aimed to examine dental treatment delays in cancer patients compared to the general population using a national claims database in South Korea. METHOD: The Korea National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort version 2.0, collected from 2002 to 2015, was analyzed. Treatment events were considered for stomatitis, tooth loss, dental caries/pulp disease, and gingivitis/periodontal disease. For each considered event, time-dependent hazard ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated by applying a subdistribution hazard model with time-varying covariates. Mortality was treated as a competing event. Subgroup analyses were conducted by type of cancer. RESULTS: The time-dependent subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) of stomatitis treatment were greater than 1 in cancer patients in all time intervals, 2.04 within 30 days after cancer diagnosis, and gradually decreased to 1.15 after 5 years. The SHR for tooth loss was less than 0.70 within 3 months after cancer diagnosis and increased to 1 after 5 years. The trends in SHRs of treatment events for other dental diseases were similar to those observed for tooth loss. Subgroup analyses by cancer type suggested that probability of all dental treatment event occurrence was higher in head and neck cancer patients, particularly in the early phase after cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Apart from treatments that are associated with cancer therapy, dental treatments in cancer patients are generally delayed and cancer patients tend to refrain from dental treatments. Consideration should be given to seeking more active and effective means for oral health promotion in cancer patients.

An approach to exploring patterns of imbalance and potential missingness in reports of the randomized baseline values for primary outcomes measurable at baseline in randomized controlled trials for meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the adequacy of randomization in randomized controlled trials by investigating baseline differences in the primary outcome when a meta-analysis employed an outcome whose baseline level was measurable. METHODS: We retrieved Cochrane reviews published during one year. We calculated the proportion of studies that reported randomized baseline values for the primary outcome. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to assess baseline imbalance and heterogeneity. We explored ranking-ordered forest plots using a normal cumulative probability curve as a guideline representing well-performed randomized trials. When skewness was suggested, a funnel plot was drawn to assess whether there was a significant linear trend. RESULTS: In 10 of 18 meta-analyses, more than 25% of trials did not report randomized baseline values of the primary outcomes. Three meta-analyses indicated baseline imbalance (P < 0.1) and three showed substantial heterogeneity (I2 > 60%). Four meta-analyses with forest plots suggesting a skewed SMD distribution also showed a linear trend on their standard errors on the funnel plot. CONCLUSIONS: If the primary outcome is measured at baseline, it is essential to explore the full scope of baseline imbalance among the trials. This could help understand patterns of bias, including missingness, for designing adjustment.

Pleural recurrence after transthoracic needle lung biopsy in stage I lung cancer: a systematic review and individual patient-level meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Conflicting results exist regarding whether preoperative transthoracic biopsy increases the risk of pleural recurrence in early lung cancer. We conducted a systematic, patient-level meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of pleural recurrence in stage I lung cancer after percutaneous transthoracic lung biopsy. METHODS: A systematic search of OVID-MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was performed through October 2018. Eligible studies were original articles on the risk of pleural recurrence in stage I lung cancer after transthoracic biopsy. We contacted the corresponding authors of eligible studies to obtain individual patient-level data. We used the Fine-Gray model for time to recurrence and lung cancer-specific survival and a Cox proportional hazards model for overall survival. RESULTS: We analysed 2394 individual patient data from 6 out of 10 eligible studies. Compared with other diagnostic procedures, transthoracic biopsy was associated with a higher risk for ipsilateral pleural recurrence, which manifested solely (subdistribution HR (sHR), 2.58; 95% CI 1.15 to 5.78) and concomitantly with other metastases (sHR 1.99; 95% CI 1.14 to 3.48). In the analysis of secondary outcomes considering a significant interaction between diagnostic procedures and age groups, reductions of time to recurrence (sHR, 2.01; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.64), lung cancer-specific survival (sHR 2.53; 95% CI 1.06 to 6.05) and overall survival (HR 2.08; 95% CI 1.12 to 3.87) were observed in patients younger than 55 years, whereas such associations were not observed in other age groups. DISCUSSION: Preoperative transthoracic lung biopsy was associated with increased pleural recurrence in stage I lung cancer and reduced survival in patients younger than 55 years.

A method for assessing robustness of the results of a star-shaped network meta-analysis under the unidentifiable consistency assumption.

BACKGROUND: In a star-shaped network, pairwise comparisons link treatments with a reference treatment (often placebo or standard care), but not with each other. Thus, comparisons between non-reference treatments rely on indirect evidence, and are based on the unidentifiable consistency assumption, limiting the reliability of the results. We suggest a method of performing a sensitivity analysis through data imputation to assess the robustness of results with an unknown degree of inconsistency. METHODS: The method involves imputation of data for randomized controlled trials comparing non-reference treatments, to produce a complete network. The imputed data simulate a situation that would allow mixed treatment comparison, with a statistically acceptable extent of inconsistency. By comparing the agreement between the results obtained from the original star-shaped network meta-analysis and the results after incorporating the imputed data, the robustness of the results of the original star-shaped network meta-analysis can be quantified and assessed. To illustrate this method, we applied it to two real datasets and some simulated datasets. RESULTS: Applying the method to the star-shaped network formed by discarding all comparisons between non-reference treatments from a real complete network, 33% of the results from the analysis incorporating imputed data under acceptable inconsistency indicated that the treatment ranking would be different from the ranking obtained from the star-shaped network. Through a simulation study, we demonstrated the sensitivity of the results after data imputation for a star-shaped network with different levels of within- and between-study variability. An extended usability of the method was also demonstrated by another example where some head-to-head comparisons were incorporated. CONCLUSIONS: Our method will serve as a practical technique to assess the reliability of results from a star-shaped network meta-analysis under the unverifiable consistency assumption.

A First-in-Human Phase I Study of GC1118, a Novel Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Antibody, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

LESSONS LEARNED: GC1118 is a novel fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody with unique binding epitopes and different ligand-binding inhibitory activity compared with cetuximab or panitumumab.GC1118 showed promising antitumor activity, especially in patients with colorectal cancer resistant to prior EGFR antibody. Skin toxicities were more common and diarrhea was less frequent compared with other anti-EGFR antibodies. BACKGROUND: GC1118 is a novel monoclonal antibody targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) with more potent ligand inhibition than cetuximab or panitumumab. We conducted a first-in-human, phase I study of GC118 in patients with refractory solid tumors. METHODS: In the dose escalation part, GC1118 was administered on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, followed by a 2-week rest, during which dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated. In the expansion part, patients were enrolled into three cohorts (Cohort 1 [C1], patients with colorectal cancer [CRC] without prior anti-EGFR treatment; Cohort 2 [C2], patients with CRC with tumors resistant to anti-EGFR therapy; Cohort 3 [C3], EGFR-overexpressing gastric cancer). RESULTS: In the dose escalation part, 24 patients were treated at five dose levels: 0.3, 1.0, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 mg/kg. In the 5.0 mg/kg cohort, two patients experienced DLTs (skin toxicities). The maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) was 4.0 mg/kg. Common adverse events were skin toxicities. In the expansion part, 39 patients were enrolled. In Cohort 1, stable disease (SD) was observed in 58%; in Cohort 2, partial response (PR) 17% and SD 8%; in Cohort 3, PR 8% and SD 17%. CONCLUSION: GC1118 showed promising antitumor activity and was well tolerated. Infrequent diarrhea compared with other anti-EGFR antibodies might be advantageous for further development.

Development of an algorithm for evaluating the impact of measurement variability on response categorization in oncology trials.

BACKGROUND: Radiologic assessments of baseline and post-treatment tumor burden are subject to measurement variability, but the impact of this variability on the objective response rate (ORR) and progression rate in specific trials has been unpredictable on a practical level. In this study, we aimed to develop an algorithm for evaluating the quantitative impact of measurement variability on the ORR and progression rate. METHODS: First, we devised a hierarchical model for estimating the distribution of measurement variability using a clinical trial dataset of computed tomography scans. Next, a simulation method was used to calculate the probability representing the effect of measurement errors on categorical diagnoses in various scenarios using the estimated distribution. Based on the probabilities derived from the simulation, we developed an algorithm to evaluate the reliability of an ORR (or progression rate) (i.e., the variation in the assessed rate) by generating a 95% central range of ORR (or progression rate) results if a reassessment was performed. Finally, we performed validation using an external dataset. In the validation of the estimated distribution of measurement variability, the coverage level was calculated as the proportion of the 95% central ranges of hypothetical second readings that covered the actual burden sizes. In the validation of the evaluation algorithm, for 100 resampled datasets, the coverage level was calculated as the proportion of the 95% central ranges of ORR results that covered the ORR from a real second assessment. RESULTS: We built a web tool for implementing the algorithm (publicly available at http://studyanalysis2017.pythonanywhere.com/ ). In the validation of the estimated distribution and the algorithm, the coverage levels were 93 and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The validation exercise using an external dataset demonstrated the adequacy of the statistical model and the utility of the developed algorithm. Quantification of variation in the ORR and progression rate due to potential measurement variability is essential and will help inform decisions made on the basis of trial data.

Evaluation of Propofol in Comparison with Other General Anesthetics for Surgery in Children Younger than 3 Years: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite well-known advantages, propofol remains off-label in many countries for general anesthesia in children under 3 years of age due to insufficient evidence regarding its use in this population. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol compared with other general anesthetics in children under 3 years of age undergoing surgery through a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing randomized clinical trials. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to find all randomized clinical trials comparing propofol with another general anesthetic that included children under 3 years of age. The relative risk or arcsine-transformed risk difference for dichotomous outcomes and the weighted or standardized mean difference for continuous outcomes were estimated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 249 young children from 6 publications were included. The children who received propofol had statistically significantly lower systolic and diastolic blood pressures, but hypotension was not observed in the propofol groups. The heart rate, stroke volume index, and cardiac index were not significantly different between the propofol and control groups. The propofol groups showed slightly shorter recovery times and a lower incidence of emergence agitation than the control groups, while no difference was observed for the incidence of hypotension, desaturation, and apnea. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that propofol use for general anesthesia in young healthy children undergoing surgery does not increase complications and that propofol could be at least comparable to other anesthetic agents.