Rationale and design of the Early valve replacement in severe ASYmptomatic Aortic Stenosis Trial.

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve replacement in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis is controversial. The Early valve replacement in severe ASYmptomatic Aortic Stenosis (EASY-AS) trial aims to determine whether early aortic valve replacement improves clinical outcomes, quality of life and cost-effectiveness compared to a guideline recommended strategy of 'watchful waiting'. METHODS: In a pragmatic international, open parallel group randomized controlled trial (NCT04204915), 2844 patients with severe aortic stenosis will be randomized 1:1 to either a strategy of early (surgical or transcatheter) aortic valve replacement or aortic valve replacement only if symptoms or impaired left ventricular function develop. Exclusion criteria include other severe valvular disease, planned cardiac surgery, ejection fraction <50%, previous aortic valve replacement or life expectancy <2 years. The primary outcome is a composite of cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization. The primary analysis will be undertaken when 663 primary events have accrued, providing 90% power to detect a reduction in the primary endpoint from 27.7% to 21.6% (hazard ratio 0.75). Secondary endpoints include disability-free survival, days alive and out of hospital, major adverse cardiovascular events and quality of life. RESULTS: Recruitment commenced in March 2020 and is open in the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Serbia. Feasibility requirements were met in July 2022, and the main phase opened in October 2022, with additional international centers in set-up. CONCLUSIONS: The EASY-AS trial will establish whether a strategy of early aortic valve replacement in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis reduces cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization and improves other important outcomes.

The NightLife study - the clinical and cost-effectiveness of thrice-weekly, extended, in-centre nocturnal haemodialysis versus daytime haemodialysis using a mixed methods approach: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In-centre nocturnal haemodialysis (INHD) offers extended-hours haemodialysis, 6 to 8 h thrice-weekly overnight, with the support of dialysis specialist nurses. There is increasing observational data demonstrating potential benefits of INHD on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There is a lack of randomised controlled trial (RCT) data to confirm these benefits and assess safety. METHODS: The NightLife study is a pragmatic, two-arm, multicentre RCT comparing the impact of 6 months INHD to conventional haemodialysis (thrice-weekly daytime in-centre haemodialysis, 3.5-5 h per session). The primary outcome is the total score from the Kidney Disease Quality of Life tool at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include sleep and cognitive function, measures of safety, adherence to dialysis and impact on clinical parameters. There is an embedded Process Evaluation to assess implementation, health economic modelling and a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention to understand factors that influence recruitment and retention. Adults (≥ 18 years old) who have been established on haemodialysis for > 3 months are eligible to participate. DISCUSSION: There are 68,000 adults in the UK that need kidney replacement therapy (KRT), with in-centre haemodialysis the treatment modality for over a third of cases. HRQoL is an independent predictor of hospitalisation and mortality in individuals on maintenance dialysis. Haemodialysis is associated with poor HRQoL in comparison to the general population. INHD has the potential to improve HRQoL. Vigorous RCT evidence of effectiveness is lacking. The NightLife study is an essential step in the understanding of dialysis therapies and will guide patient-centred decisions regarding KRT in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number: ISRCTN87042063. Registered: 14/07/2020.

The effectiveness of the Structured Health Intervention For Truckers (SHIFT): a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT).

BACKGROUND: Long distance heavy goods vehicle (HGV) drivers exhibit higher than nationally representative rates of obesity, and obesity-related co-morbidities, and are underserved in terms of health promotion initiatives. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the multicomponent 'Structured Health Intervention For Truckers' (SHIFT), compared to usual care, at 6- and 16-18-month follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a two-arm cluster RCT in transport sites throughout the Midlands, UK. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline, at 6- and 16-18-month follow-up. Clusters were randomised (1:1) following baseline measurements to either the SHIFT arm or usual practice control arm. The 6-month SHIFT programme included a group-based interactive 6-h education and behaviour change session, health coach support and equipment provision (Fitbit® and resistance bands/balls to facilitate a 'cab workout'). The primary outcome was device-assessed physical activity (mean steps/day) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included the following: device-assessed sitting, physical activity intensity and sleep; cardiometabolic health, diet, mental wellbeing and work-related psychosocial variables. Data were analysed using mixed-effect linear regression models using a complete-case population. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-two HGV drivers (mean ± SD age: 48.4 ± 9.4 years, BMI: 30.4 ± 5.1 kg/m2, 99% male) were recruited across 25 clusters (sites) and randomised into either the SHIFT (12 clusters, n = 183) or control (13 clusters, n = 199) arms. At 6 months, 209 (55%) participants provided primary outcome data. Significant differences in mean daily steps were found between groups, in favour of the SHIFT arm (adjusted mean difference: 1008 steps/day, 95% CI: 145-1871, p = 0.022). Favourable differences were also seen in the SHIFT group, relative to the control group, in time spent sitting (- 24 mins/day, 95% CI: - 43 to - 6), and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (6 mins/day, 95% CI: 0.3-11). Differences were not maintained at 16-18 months. No differences were observed between groups in the other secondary outcomes at either follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The SHIFT programme led to a potentially clinically meaningful difference in daily steps, between trial arms, at 6 months. Whilst the longer-term impact is unclear, the programme offers potential to be incorporated into driver training courses to promote activity in this at-risk, underserved and hard-to-reach essential occupational group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN10483894 (date registered: 01/03/2017).

Astegolimab, an anti-ST2, in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD-ST2OP): a phase 2a, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous inflammatory airway disease. The epithelial-derived IL-33 and its receptor ST2 have been implicated in airway inflammation and infection. We aimed to determine whether astegolimab, a selective ST2 IgG2 monoclonal antibody, reduces exacerbations in COPD. METHODS: COPD-ST2OP was a single-centre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 2a trial in moderate-to-very severe COPD. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) with a web-based system to received 490 mg subcutaneous astegolimab or subcutaneous placebo, every 4 weeks for 44 weeks. The primary endpoint was exacerbation rate assessed for 48 weeks assessed with a negative binomial count model in the intention-to-treat population, with prespecified subgroup analysis by baseline blood eosinophil count. The model was the number of exacerbations over the 48-week treatment period, with treatment group as a covariate. Safety was assessed in the whole study population until week 60. Secondary endpoints included Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-C), FEV1, and blood and sputum cell counts. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03615040. FINDINGS: The exacerbation rate at 48 weeks in the intention-to-treat analysis was not significantly different between the astegolimab group (2·18 [95% CI 1·59 to 2·78]) and the placebo group (2·81 [2·05 to 3·58]; rate ratio 0·78 [95% CI 0·53 to 1·14]; p=0·19]). In the prespecified analysis stratifying patients by blood eosinophil count, patients with 170 or fewer cells per µL had 0·69 exacerbations (0·39 to 1·21), whereas those with more than 170 cells per µL had 0·83 exacerbations (0·49 to 1·40). For the secondary outcomes, the mean difference between the SGRQ-C in the astegolimab group versus placebo group was -3·3 (95% CI -6·4 to -0·2; p=0·039), and mean difference in FEV1 between the two groups was 40 mL (-10 to 90; p=0·094). The difference in geometric mean ratios between the two groups for blood eosinophil counts was 0·59 (95% CI 0·51 to 0·69; p<0·001) and 0·25 (0·19 to 0·33; p<0·001) for sputum eosinophil counts. Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between groups. INTERPRETATION: In patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, astegolimab did not significantly reduce exacerbation rate, but did improve health status compared with placebo. FUNDING: Funded by Genentech and National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres.

Synchronous versus sequential chemo-radiotherapy in patients with early stage breast cancer (SECRAB): A randomised, phase III, trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal sequence of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for breast cancer is unknown. SECRAB assesses whether local control can be improved without increased toxicity. METHODS: SECRAB was a prospective, open-label, multi-centre, phase III trial comparing synchronous to sequential chemo-radiotherapy, conducted in 48 UK centres. Patients with invasive, early stage breast cancer were eligible. Randomisation (performed using random permuted block assignment) was stratified by centre, axillary surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy boost. Permitted chemotherapy regimens included CMF and anthracycline-CMF. Synchronous radiotherapy was administered between cycles two and three for CMF or five and six for anthracycline-CMF. Sequential radiotherapy was delivered on chemotherapy completion. Radiotherapy schedules included 40 Gy/15F over three weeks, and 50 Gy/25F over five weeks. The primary outcome was local recurrence at five and ten years, defined as time to local recurrence, and analysed by intention to treat. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00003893. FINDINGS: Between 02-July-1998 and 25-March-2004, 2297 patients were recruited (1150 synchronous and 1146 sequential). Baseline characteristics were balanced. With 10.2 years median follow-up, the ten-year local recurrence rates were 4.6% and 7.1% in the synchronous and sequential arms respectively (hazard ratio (HR) 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43-0.90; p = 0.012). In a planned sub-group analysis of anthracycline-CMF, the ten-year local recurrence rates difference were 3.5% versus 6.7% respectively (HR 0.48 95% CI: 0.26-0.88; p = 0.018). There was no significant difference in overall or disease-free survival. 24% of patients on the synchronous arm suffered moderate/severe acute skin reactions compared to 15% on the sequential arm (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in late adverse effects apart from telangiectasia (p = 0.03). INTERPRETATION: Synchronous chemo-radiotherapy significantly improved local recurrence rates. This was delivered with an acceptable increase in acute toxicity. The greatest benefit of synchronous chemo-radiation was in patients treated with anthracycline-CMF. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK (CR UK/98/001) and Pharmacia.

Pathway-based subnetworks enable cross-disease biomarker discovery.

Biomarkers lie at the heart of precision medicine. Surprisingly, while rapid genomic profiling is becoming ubiquitous, the development of biomarkers usually involves the application of bespoke techniques that cannot be directly applied to other datasets. There is an urgent need for a systematic methodology to create biologically-interpretable molecular models that robustly predict key phenotypes. Here we present SIMMS (Subnetwork Integration for Multi-Modal Signatures): an algorithm that fragments pathways into functional modules and uses these to predict phenotypes. We apply SIMMS to multiple data types across five diseases, and in each it reproducibly identifies known and novel subtypes, and makes superior predictions to the best bespoke approaches. To demonstrate its ability on a new dataset, we profile 33 genes/nodes of the PI3K pathway in 1734 FFPE breast tumors and create a four-subnetwork prediction model. This model out-performs a clinically-validated molecular test in an independent cohort of 1742 patients. SIMMS is generic and enables systematic data integration for robust biomarker discovery.

Molecular stratification of early breast cancer identifies drug targets to drive stratified medicine.

Many women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer can be managed effectively with endocrine therapies alone. However, additional systemic chemotherapy treatment is necessary for others. The clinical challenges in managing high-risk women are to identify existing and novel druggable targets, and to identify those who would benefit from these therapies. Therefore, we performed mRNA abundance analysis using the Tamoxifen and Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational (TEAM) trial pathology cohort to identify a signature of residual risk following endocrine therapy and pathways that are potentially druggable. A panel of genes compiled from academic and commercial multiparametric tests as well as genes of importance to breast cancer pathogenesis was used to profile 3825 patients. A signature of 95 genes, including nodal status, was validated to stratify endocrine-treated patients into high-risk and low-risk groups based on distant relapse-free survival (DRFS; Hazard Ratio = 5.05, 95% CI 3.53-7.22, p = 7.51 × 10-19). This risk signature was also found to perform better than current multiparametric tests. When the 95-gene prognostic signature was applied to all patients in the validation cohort, including patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, the signature remained prognostic (HR = 4.76, 95% CI 3.61-6.28, p = 2.53× 10-28). Functional gene interaction analyses identified six significant modules representing pathways involved in cell cycle control, mitosis and receptor tyrosine signaling; containing a number of genes with existing targeted therapies for use in breast or other malignancies. Thus the identification of high-risk patients using this prognostic signature has the potential to also prioritize patients for treatment with these targeted therapies.

HER2 status predicts for upfront AI benefit: A TRANS-AIOG meta-analysis of 12,129 patients from ATAC, BIG 1-98 and TEAM with centrally determined HER2.

BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis of the effects of HER2 status, specifically within the first 2-3 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy, has the potential to inform patient selection for upfront aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy or switching strategy tamoxifen followed by AI. The pre-existing standardisation of methodology for HER2 (immunohistochemistry/fluorescence in situ hybridization) facilitates analysis of existing data for this key marker. METHODS: Following a prospectively designed statistical analysis plan, patient data from 3 phase III trials Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination Trial (ATAC), Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 and Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multicentre Trial (TEAM)] comparing an AI to tamoxifen during the first 2-3 years of adjuvant endocrine treatment were collected and a treatment-by-marker analysis of distant recurrence-free interval-censored at 2-3 years treatment - for HER2 status × AI versus tamoxifen treatment was performed to address the clinical question relating to efficacy of 'upfront' versus 'switch' strategies for AIs. RESULTS: A prospectively planned, patient-level data meta-analysis across 3 trials demonstrated a significant treatment (AI versus tamoxifen) by marker (HER2) interaction in a multivariate analysis; (interaction hazard ratio [HR] = 1.61, 95% CI 1.01-2.57; p < 0.05). Heterogeneity between trials did not reach statistical significance. The HER2 negative (HER2-ve) group gained greater benefit from AI versus tamoxifen (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.56-0.87) than the HER2-positive (HER2+ve) group (HR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.75-1.71). However, the small number of HER2+ve cases (n = 1092 across the 3 trials) and distant recurrences (n = 111) may explain heterogeneity between trials. CONCLUSIONS: A patient-level data meta-analysis demonstrated a significant interaction between HER2 status and treatment with AI versus tamoxifen in the first 2-3 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Patients with HER2-ve cancers experienced improved outcomes (distant relapse) when treated with upfront AI rather than tamoxifen, whilst patients with HER2+ve cancers fared no better or slightly worse in the first 2-3 years. However, the small number of HER2+ve cancers/events may explain a large degree of heterogeneity in the HER2+ve groups across all 3 trials. Other causes, perhaps related to subtle differences between AIs, cannot be excluded and warrant further exploration.

Mutational analysis of PI3K/AKT signaling pathway in tamoxifen exemestane adjuvant multinational pathology study.

PURPOSE: Deregulation of key PI3K/AKT pathway genes may contribute to endocrine resistance in breast cancer (BC). PIK3CA is the most frequently mutated gene in luminal BC (35%); however, the effect of mutations in helical versus kinase domains remains controversial. We hypothesize that improved outcomes occur in patients with estrogen receptor­positive (ER positive) BC receiving endocrine therapy and possessing PIK3CA mutations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DNA was extracted from 4,540 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded BC samples from the Exemestane Versus Tamoxifen-Exemestane pathology study. Mutational analyses were performed for 25 mutations (PIK3CAx10, AKT1x1, KRASx5, HRASx3, NRASx2 and BRAFx4). RESULTS: PIK3CA mutations were frequent (39.8%), whereas RAS/RAF mutations were rare (1%). In univariable analyses PIK3CA mutations were associated with significantly improved 5-year distant relapse-free survival (DRFS; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.91; P = .003). However, a multivariable analysis correcting for known clinical and biologic prognostic factors failed to demonstrate that PIK3CA mutation status is an independent prognostic marker for DRFS (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.12; P = .4012). PIK3CA mutations were more frequent in low-risk luminal BCs (e.g., grade 1 nodev 3, node-negative v -positive), confounding the relationship between mutations and outcome. CONCLUSION: PIK3CA mutations are present in approximately 40% of luminal BCs but are not an independent predictor of outcome in the context of endocrine therapy, whereas RAS/RAF mutations are rare inluminal BC. A complex relationship between low-risk cancers and PIK3CA mutations was identified. Although the PI3K/AKT pathway remains a viable therapeutic target as the result of ahigh mutation frequency, PIK3CA mutations do not seem to affect residual risk following treatment with endocrine therapy.

Estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor as predictive biomarkers of response to endocrine therapy: a prospectively powered pathology study in the Tamoxifen and Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational trial.

PURPOSE: The Tamoxifen and Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational (TEAM) trial included a prospectively planned pathology substudy testing the predictive value of progesterone receptor (PgR) expression for outcome of estrogen receptor-positive (ER-positive) early breast cancer treated with exemestane versus tamoxifen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pathology blocks from 4,781 TEAM patients randomly assigned to exemestane versus tamoxifen followed by exemestane for 5 years of total therapy were collected centrally, and tissue microarrays were constructed from samples from 4,598 patients. Quantitative analysis of hormone receptors (ER and PgR) was performed by using image analysis and immunohistochemistry, and the results were linked to outcome data from the main TEAM trial and analyzed relative to disease-free survival and treatment. RESULTS: Of 4,325 eligible ER-positive patients, 23% were PgR-poor (Allred < 4) and 77% were PgR- rich (Allred ≥ 5). No treatment-by-marker effect for PgR was observed for exemestane versus tamoxifen (PgR-rich hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.05; PgR-poor HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.19; P = .88 for interaction). Both PgR and ER expression were associated with patient prognosis in univariate (PgR HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.65; P < .001; ER HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.86; P = .002), and multivariate analyses (P < .001 and P = .001, respectively). A trend toward a treatment-by-marker effect for ER-rich patients was observed. CONCLUSION: Preferential exemestane versus tamoxifen treatment benefit was not predicted by PgR expression; conversely, patients with ER-rich tumors may derive additional benefit from exemestane. Quantitative analysis of ER and PgR expression provides highly significant information on risk of early relapse (within 1 to 3 years) during treatment.

Prognostic factor analysis of the survival of elderly patients with AML in the MRC AML11 and LRF AML14 trials.

This analysis, of 2483 patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) aged 60+ years entered into two UK trials, was performed to determine the baseline parameters related to survival and to develop a risk index. The Medical Research Council (MRC) AML11 trial (n = 1071) was used to develop the index; this was validated using data from the Leukaemia Research fund (LRF) AML14 trial on 1137 intensively (AML14I) and 275 non-intensively (AML14NI) treated patients. In AML11, cytogenetic group, age, white blood count, performance status and type of AML (de novo, secondary) were all highly significantly related to prognosis in multivariate analysis. The regression coefficients were used to define good, standard and poor risk groups, with 1-year survival of 53%, 43% and 16% respectively (P < 0.0001). The risk index showed very good discrimination in both AML14I and AML14NI (both P < 0.0001), thereby providing validation, although survival in all groups was very poor in AML14NI. The risk factors for survival in older AML patients were similar to those in younger ones and discrimination of patient groups with relatively good to very poor prognosis was possible. These risk groups apply to both intensively and non-intensively treated patients. Randomized trials of intensive versus non-intensive therapy are needed to determine which types of patient should be given which type of treatment.