Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Lancet ; 399(10323): 447-460, 2022 01 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34953525

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Men with high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer are treated with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for 3 years, often combined with radiotherapy. We analysed new data from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials done in a multiarm, multistage platform protocol to assess the efficacy of adding abiraterone and prednisolone alone or with enzalutamide to ADT in this patient population. METHODS: These open-label, phase 3 trials were done at 113 sites in the UK and Switzerland. Eligible patients (no age restrictions) had high-risk (defined as node positive or, if node negative, having at least two of the following: tumour stage T3 or T4, Gleason sum score of 8-10, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] concentration ≥40 ng/mL) or relapsing with high-risk features (≤12 months of total ADT with an interval of ≥12 months without treatment and PSA concentration ≥4 ng/mL with a doubling time of <6 months, or a PSA concentration ≥20 ng/mL, or nodal relapse) non-metastatic prostate cancer, and a WHO performance status of 0-2. Local radiotherapy (as per local guidelines, 74 Gy in 37 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles or the equivalent using hypofractionated schedules) was mandated for node negative and encouraged for node positive disease. In both trials, patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by use of a computerised algorithm, to ADT alone (control group), which could include surgery and luteinising-hormone-releasing hormone agonists and antagonists, or with oral abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and oral prednisolone (5 mg daily; combination-therapy group). In the second trial with no overlapping controls, the combination-therapy group also received enzalutamide (160 mg daily orally). ADT was given for 3 years and combination therapy for 2 years, except if local radiotherapy was omitted when treatment could be delivered until progression. In this primary analysis, we used meta-analysis methods to pool events from both trials. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was metastasis-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, biochemical failure-free survival, progression-free survival, and toxicity and adverse events. For 90% power and a one-sided type 1 error rate set to 1·25% to detect a target hazard ratio for improvement in metastasis-free survival of 0·75, approximately 315 metastasis-free survival events in the control groups was required. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety according to the treatment started within randomised allocation. STAMPEDE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00268476, and with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN78818544. FINDINGS: Between Nov 15, 2011, and March 31, 2016, 1974 patients were randomly assigned to treatment. The first trial allocated 455 to the control group and 459 to combination therapy, and the second trial, which included enzalutamide, allocated 533 to the control group and 527 to combination therapy. Median age across all groups was 68 years (IQR 63-73) and median PSA 34 ng/ml (14·7-47); 774 (39%) of 1974 patients were node positive, and 1684 (85%) were planned to receive radiotherapy. With median follow-up of 72 months (60-84), there were 180 metastasis-free survival events in the combination-therapy groups and 306 in the control groups. Metastasis-free survival was significantly longer in the combination-therapy groups (median not reached, IQR not evaluable [NE]-NE) than in the control groups (not reached, 97-NE; hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·44-0·64, p<0·0001). 6-year metastasis-free survival was 82% (95% CI 79-85) in the combination-therapy group and 69% (66-72) in the control group. There was no evidence of a difference in metatasis-free survival when enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate were administered concurrently compared with abiraterone acetate alone (interaction HR 1·02, 0·70-1·50, p=0·91) and no evidence of between-trial heterogeneity (I2 p=0·90). Overall survival (median not reached [IQR NE-NE] in the combination-therapy groups vs not reached [103-NE] in the control groups; HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·48-0·73, p<0·0001), prostate cancer-specific survival (not reached [NE-NE] vs not reached [NE-NE]; 0·49, 0·37-0·65, p<0·0001), biochemical failure-free-survival (not reached [NE-NE] vs 86 months [83-NE]; 0·39, 0·33-0·47, p<0·0001), and progression-free-survival (not reached [NE-NE] vs not reached [103-NE]; 0·44, 0·36-0·54, p<0·0001) were also significantly longer in the combination-therapy groups than in the control groups. Adverse events grade 3 or higher during the first 24 months were, respectively, reported in 169 (37%) of 451 patients and 130 (29%) of 455 patients in the combination-therapy and control groups of the abiraterone trial, respectively, and 298 (58%) of 513 patients and 172 (32%) of 533 patients of the combination-therapy and control groups of the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial, respectively. The two most common events more frequent in the combination-therapy groups were hypertension (abiraterone trial: 23 (5%) in the combination-therapy group and six (1%) in control group; abiraterone and enzalutamide trial: 73 (14%) and eight (2%), respectively) and alanine transaminitis (abiraterone trial: 25 (6%) in the combination-therapy group and one (<1%) in control group; abiraterone and enzalutamide trial: 69 (13%) and four (1%), respectively). Seven grade 5 adverse events were reported: none in the control groups, three in the abiraterone acetate and prednisolone group (one event each of rectal adenocarcinoma, pulmonary haemorrhage, and a respiratory disorder), and four in the abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with enzalutamide group (two events each of septic shock and sudden death). INTERPRETATION: Among men with high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer, combination therapy is associated with significantly higher rates of metastasis-free survival compared with ADT alone. Abiraterone acetate with prednisolone should be considered a new standard treatment for this population. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Janssen, and Astellas.


Asunto(s)
Acetato de Abiraterona/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/epidemiología , Prednisolona/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Acetato de Abiraterona/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Benzamidas/administración & dosificación , Benzamidas/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/estadística & datos numéricos , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Clasificación del Tumor , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/prevención & control , Nitrilos/administración & dosificación , Nitrilos/efectos adversos , Feniltiohidantoína/administración & dosificación , Feniltiohidantoína/efectos adversos , Prednisolona/efectos adversos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
2.
Res Sq ; 2023 Feb 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36798177

RESUMEN

Metastatic and high-risk localized prostate cancer respond to hormone therapy but outcomes vary. Following a pre-specified statistical plan, we used Cox models adjusted for clinical variables to test associations with survival of multi-gene expression-based classifiers from 781 patients randomized to androgen deprivation with or without abiraterone in the STAMPEDE trial. Decipher score was strongly prognostic (p<2×10-5) and identified clinically-relevant differences in absolute benefit, especially for localized cancers. In metastatic disease, classifiers of proliferation, PTEN or TP53 loss and treatment-persistent cells were prognostic. In localized disease, androgen receptor activity was protective whilst interferon signaling (that strongly associated with tumor lymphocyte infiltration) was detrimental. Post-Operative Radiation-Therapy Outcomes Score was prognostic in localized but not metastatic disease (interaction p=0.0001) suggesting the impact of tumor biology on clinical outcome is context-dependent on metastatic state. Transcriptome-wide testing has clinical utility for advanced prostate cancer and identified worse outcomes for localized cancers with tumor-promoting inflammation.

3.
JCO Precis Oncol ; 4: 882-897, 2020 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35050761

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The STAMPEDE trial recruits men with newly diagnosed, high-risk, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. To ascertain the feasibility of targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) and the prevalence of baseline genomic aberrations, we sequenced tumor and germline DNA from patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) starting long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS: In a 2-stage approach, archival, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) prostate tumor core biopsy samples were retrospectively subjected to 2 tNGS assays. Prospective enrollment enabled validation using tNGS in tumor and germline DNA. RESULTS: In stage 1, tNGS data were obtained from 185 tumors from 287 patients (65%); 98% had de novo mPCa. We observed PI3K pathway aberrations in 43%, due to PTEN copy-number loss (34%) and/or activating mutations in PIK3 genes or AKT (18%) and TP53 mutation or loss in 33%. No androgen receptor (AR) aberrations were detected; RB1 loss was observed in < 1%. In stage 2, 93 (92%) of 101 FFPE tumors (biopsy obtained within 8 months) were successfully sequenced prospectively. The prevalence of DNA damage repair (DDR) deficiency was 14% (somatic) and 5% (germline). BRCA2 mutations and mismatch repair gene mutations were exclusive to high-volume disease. Aberrant DDR (22% v 15%), Wnt pathway (16% v 4%), and chromatin remodeling (16% v 8%) were all more common in high-volume compared with low-volume disease, but the small numbers limited statistical comparisons. CONCLUSION: Prospective genomic characterization is feasible using residual diagnostic tumor samples and reveals that the genomic landscapes of de novo high-volume mPCa and advanced metastatic prostate cancer have notable similarities (PI3K pathway, DDR, Wnt, chromatin remodeling) and differences (AR, RB1). These results will inform the design and conduct of biomarker-directed trials in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.

4.
Trials ; 20(1): 264, 2019 May 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31138317

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There are limited research and literature on the trial management challenges encountered in running adaptive platform trials. This trial design allows both (1) the seamless addition of new research comparisons when compelling clinical and scientific research questions emerge, and (2) early stopping of accrual to individual comparisons that do not show sufficient activity without affecting other active comparisons. Adaptive platform design trials also offer many potential benefits over traditional trials, from faster time to accrual to contemporaneously recruiting multiple research comparisons, added flexibility to focus on more promising research comparisons via pre-planned interim analyses and potentially shorter time to primary results. We share here our experiences from a trial management perspective, highlighting the challenges and successes. METHODS: We evaluated the operational aspects of making changes to these adaptive platform trials and identified both common and trial-specific challenges. The operational steps and challenges linked to both the addition of new research comparisons and stopping recruitment following pre-planned interim analysis were considered in our evaluation. RESULTS: Specific operational challenges in these adaptive platform protocols, additional to those in traditional two-arm trials, were identified. Key lessons are presented describing some of the solutions and considerations over conducting these trials. Careful consideration on the practicality of the protocol structure (modular versus single protocol), the longevity and continuity of trial oversight committees, and having clear clinical and scientific criteria for the addition of new research comparisons were identified as some of the most common challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the operational complexities associated with running adaptive platform protocols is paramount for their conduct, adaptive platform trials offer an efficient model to run randomised controlled trials and we are continuing to work to reduce further the effort required from an operational perspective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: FOCUS4: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN90061546 . Registered on 16 October 2013. STAMPEDE: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN78818544 . Registered on 2 February 2004.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos Clínicos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Humanos , Liderazgo , Revisión por Pares , Proyectos de Investigación
5.
Lancet Respir Med ; 4(12): 980-989, 2016 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27773665

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Observational data have been conflicted regarding the potential role of HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) as a causative factor for, or protective factor against, COPD. We therefore aimed to investigate the effect of immediate versus deferred ART on decline in lung function in HIV-positive individuals. METHODS: We did a nested substudy within the randomised, controlled Strategic Timing of Antiretroviral Treatment (START) trial at 80 sites in multiple settings in 20 high-income and low-to-middle-income countries. Participants were HIV-1 infected individuals aged at least 25 years, naive to ART, with CD4 T-cell counts of more than 500 per µL, not receiving treatment for asthma, and without recent respiratory infections (baseline COPD was not an exclusion criterion). Participants were randomly assigned to receive ART (an approved drug combination derived from US Department of Health and Human Services guidelines) either immediately, or deferred until CD4 T-cell counts decreased to 350 per µL or AIDS developed. The randomisation was determined by participation in the parent START study, and was not specific to the substudy. Because of the nature of our study, site investigators and participants were not masked to the treatment group assignment; however, the assessors who reviewed the outcomes were masked to the treatment group. The primary outcome was the annual rate of decline in lung function, expressed as the FEV1 slope in mL/year; spirometry was done annually during follow-up for up to 5 years. We analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis, and planned separate analyses in smokers and non-smokers because of the known effects of smoking on FEV1 decline. The substudy was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01797367. FINDINGS: Between March 11, 2010, and Aug 23, 2013, we enrolled 1026 participants to our substudy, who were then randomly assigned to either immediate (n=518) or deferred (n=508) ART. Median baseline characteristics included age 36 years (IQR 30-44), CD4 T-cell count 648 per µL (583-767), and HIV plasma viral load 4·2 log10 copies per mL (3·5-4·7). 29% were female and 28% were current smokers. Median follow-up time was 2·0 years (IQR 1·9-3·0). We noted no differences in FEV1 slopes between the immediate and deferred ART groups either in smokers (difference of -3·3 mL/year, 95% CI -38·8 to 32·2; p=0·86) or in non-smokers (difference of -5·6 mL/year, -29·4 to 18·3; p=0·65) or in pooled analyses adjusted for smoking status at each study visit (difference of -5·2 mL/year, -25·1 to 14·6; p=0·61). INTERPRETATION: The timing of ART initiation has no major short-term effect on rate of lung function decline in HIV-positive individuals who are naive to ART, with CD4 T-cell counts of more than 500 per µL. In light of updated WHO recommendations that all HIV-positive individuals should be treated with ART, regardless of their CD4 T-cell count, our results suggest an absence of significant pulmonary harm with such an approach. FUNDING: US National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Division of AIDS, Agence Nationale de Recherches sur le SIDA et les Hipatites Virales (France), Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Danish National Research Foundation, European AIDS Treatment Network, German Ministry of Education and Research, UK Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research, and US Veterans Health Administration Office of Research and Development.


Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH/administración & dosificación , Seropositividad para VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Tiempo de Tratamiento , Adulto , Recuento de Linfocito CD4 , Linfocitos T CD4-Positivos/virología , Esquema de Medicación , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Seropositividad para VIH/fisiopatología , Humanos , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Pulmón/virología , Masculino , Pruebas de Función Respiratoria , Carga Viral/efectos de los fármacos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA