Erdafitinib or Chemotherapy in Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib is a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in adults with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who have progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. The effects of erdafitinib in patients with FGFR-altered metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progression during or after treatment with checkpoint inhibitors (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1] or anti-programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1] agents) are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a global phase 3 trial of erdafitinib as compared with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who had progression after one or two previous treatments that included an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive erdafitinib or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel or vinflunine). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients underwent randomization: 136 to the erdafitinib group and 130 to the chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 15.9 months. The median overall survival was significantly longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (12.1 months vs. 7.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.88; P = 0.005). The median progression-free survival was also longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (5.6 months vs. 2.7 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78; P<0.001). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (45.9% in the erdafitinib group and 46.4% in the chemotherapy group). Treatment-related adverse events that led to death were less common with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (in 0.7% vs. 5.4% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and FGFR alterations after previous anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; THOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03390504.).

Risk estimation for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection based on clinical factors.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has risen dramatically during the last decade. Although patients respond well to medical therapy such as vancomycin, 20%-30% of patients treated suffer a recurrence of CDI. METHODS: We developed a simple/practical scoring rule (logistic regression model) for recurrent CDI using data from 2 large phase 3 clinical trials. Seventy-seven baseline CDI factors were classified: demographics, comorbidity, medications, vital signs, laboratory tests, severity, and symptoms. Predictors with the highest discrimination in each class (using receiver operating characteristics curve) were selected. For the final model, stepwise selection was performed. Discrimination, calibration, and internal validation were used to assess the model. RESULTS: The final model with a simple scoring rule was developed. It includes 4 independent risk factors that are readily available when the patient makes initial contact: age (<75 vs ≥75 years), number of unformed bowel movements during previous 24 hours (<10 vs ≥10), serum creatinine leves (<1.2 mg/dL vs ≥1.2 mg/dL) and prior episode of CDI (yes vs no). In addition, the model includes choice of treatment (vancomycin or fidaxomicin). CONCLUSIONS: The prediction model for recurrence may be useful for treatment decision. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00314951 and NCT00468728.

Derivation and validation of a simple clinical bedside score (ATLAS) for Clostridium difficile infection which predicts response to therapy.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) continues to be a frequent and potentially severe infection. There is currently no validated clinical tool for use at the time of CDI diagnosis to categorize patients in order to predict response to therapy. METHODS: Six clinical and laboratory variables, measured at the time of CDI diagnosis, were combined in order to assess their correlation with treatment response in a large CDI clinical trial database (derivation cohort). The final categorization scheme was chosen in order to maximize the number of categories (discrimination) while maintaining a high correlation with clinical cure assessed two days after the end of therapy. Validation of the derived scoring scheme was done on a second large CDI clinical trial database (validation cohort). A third comparison was done on the two pooled databases (pooled cohort). RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, the best discrimination and correlation with cure was seen with a five-component ATLAS score (age, treatment with systemic antibiotics, leukocyte count, albumin and serum creatinine as a measure of renal function), which divided CDI patients into 11 groups (scores of 0 to 10 inclusive) and was highly correlated with treatment outcome (R(2) = 0.95; P<0.001). This scheme showed excellent prediction of cure in the validation cohort (overall Kappa = 95.2%; P<0.0001), as well as in the pooled cohort, regardless of treatment (fidaxomicin or vancomycin). CONCLUSIONS: A combination of five simple and commonly available clinical and laboratory variables measured at the time of CDI diagnosis, combined into a scoring system (ATLAS), are able to accurately predict treatment response to CDI therapy. The ATLAS scoring system may be useful in stratifying CDI patients so that appropriate therapies can be chosen to maximize cure rates, as well as for categorization of patients in CDI therapeutic studies in order allow comparisons of patient groups.

Decreased cure and increased recurrence rates for Clostridium difficile infection caused by the epidemic C. difficile BI strain.

BACKGROUND: An epidemic strain of Clostridium difficile designated by restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) as group BI has caused multiple outbreaks of severe C. difficile infection (CDI). The treatment response of patients infected with this strain is uncertain. METHODS: Clostridium difficile isolates were collected from 2 phase 3 clinical trials comparing fidaxomicin to vancomycin and typed using REA. Clinical cure and recurrence outcomes were analyzed by strain type of the infecting organism, BI and non-BI, using both univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: From 999 patients, 719 isolates were available for typing (356 fidaxomicin treated and 363 vancomycin treated). BI was the most common REA group (34% of isolates). Patients infected with BI had lower cure rates (86.6%; 214 of 247) than those infected with non-BI strains (94.3%; 445 of 472) (P < .001). The cure rate difference between the BI and non-BI patients was significant for both vancomycin (P = .02) and fidaxomicin (P = .007). BI patients had a recurrence rate of 27.4% (51 of 186), compared with a recurrence rate of 16.6% (66 of 397) in non-BI patients (P = .002). By multivariate analysis, BI infection was statistically significant as a risk factor for reduced cure (odds ratio [OR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], .27-.85; P = .030) and for increased recurrence (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.01-2.45; P = .046). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical cure rate of patients infected with the epidemic BI C. difficile strain is lower than the cure rate of those infected with non-BI strains whether treated with fidaxomicin or vancomycin. Similarly, the CDI recurrence rate is increased in patients with the BI strain compared with patients with other C. difficile strains.

Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for Clostridium difficile infection: meta-analysis of pivotal randomized controlled trials.

Two recently completed phase 3 trials (003 and 004) showed fidaxomicin to be noninferior to vancomycin for curing Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) and superior for reducing CDI recurrences. In both studies, adults with active CDI were randomized to receive blinded fidaxomicin 200 mg twice daily or vancomycin 125 mg 4 times a day for 10 days. Post hoc exploratory intent-to-treat (ITT) time-to-event analyses were undertaken on the combined study 003 and 004 data, using fixed-effects meta-analysis and Cox regression models. ITT analysis of the combined 003/004 data for 1164 patients showed that fidaxomicin reduced persistent diarrhea, recurrence, or death by 40% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26%-51%; P < .0001) compared with vancomycin through day 40. A 37% (95% CI, 2%-60%; P = .037) reduction in persistent diarrhea or death was evident through day 12 (heterogeneity P = .50 vs 13-40 days), driven by 7 (1.2%) fidaxomicin versus 17 (2.9%) vancomycin deaths at <12 days. Low albumin level, low eosinophil count, and CDI treatment preenrollment were risk factors for persistent diarrhea or death at 12 days, and CDI in the previous 3 months was a risk factor for recurrence (all P < .01). Fidaxomicin has the potential to substantially improve outcomes from CDI.

Resolution of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in patients with cancer treated with fidaxomicin or vancomycin.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer are at increased risk for Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD). Little is known about treatment response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two double-blind trials randomly allocated 1,105 patients with CDAD to fidaxomicin or vancomycin treatment (modified intent-to-treat [mITT]), and 183 of these had cancer. Univariate and multivariate post hoc analyses compared effects of treatment and patient characteristics on cure, recurrence, and sustained response after 4 weeks. Time to resolution of diarrhea (TTROD) was also evaluated. RESULTS: Patients with cancer had a lower cure rate and longer TTROD than patients without cancer. Recurrence rates were similar. Cure was more likely with fidaxomicin than vancomycin (odds ratio [OR] 2.0; P = .065), recurrence was less likely (OR = 0.37; P = .018), and sustained response more frequent (OR = 2.56; P = .003). Under vancomycin, median TTROD was longer in patients with cancer than in those without (123 v 58 hours; log-rank P < .001). With fidaxomicin, median TTROD was not significantly affected by presence of cancer (74 v 54 hours; log-rank P = .145). In the full mITT population, age, hypoalbuminemia, and cancer were inversely associated with clinical cure by multivariate analysis. Study treatment with vancomycin was a significant predictor of recurrence (P < .001). Within the cancer population, low albumin was negatively and fidaxomicin was positively associated with improved cure. CONCLUSION: For patients with cancer, fidaxomicin treatment was superior to vancomycin, resulting in higher cure and sustained response rates, shorter TTROD, and fewer recurrences.