Atezolizumab plus modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil as first-line treatment for advanced anal cancer (SCARCE C17-02 PRODIGE 60): a randomised, non-comparative, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (mDCF) regimen has shown efficacy and safety as first-line treatment for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, making it a standard regimen. Inhibitors of programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand, such as pembrolizumab, nivolumab, retifanlimab, avelumab, and atezolizumab, have shown some antitumour activity as monotherapy in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus that is refractory to chemotherapy. This phase 2 study evaluated the combination of mDCF and atezolizumab as first-line treatment in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, non-comparative, phase 2 study, participants from 21 centres (academic, private, and community hospitals and cancer research centres) across France with chemo-naive, metastatic, or unresectable locally advanced recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, aged 18 years or older, and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly allocated (2:1) to receive either atezolizumab (800 mg intravenously every 2 weeks up to 1 year) plus mDCF (eight cycles of 40 mg per m2 docetaxel and 40 mg per m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1200 mg per m2 per day of fluorouracil for 2 days, every 2 weeks intravenously; group A) or mDCF alone (group B). Randomisation was done centrally using a minimisation technique and was stratified by age (<65 years vs ≥65 years) and disease status. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed 12-month progression-free survival in the modified intention-to-treat population in group A (35% for the null hypothesis and 50% for the alternative hypothesis). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03519295, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: 97 evaluable participants (64 in group A and 33 in group B) were enrolled between July 3, 2018, and Aug 19, 2020. The median follow-up was 26·5 months (95% CI 24·8-28·4). The median age of participants was 64·1 years (IQR 56·2-71·6), and 71 (73%) were female. 12-month progression-free survival was 45% (90% CI 35-55) in group A and 43% (29-58) in group B. In participants with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater, 12-month progression-free survival was 70% (95% CI 47-100) in group A and 40% (19-85) in group B (interaction p=0·051) Both groups showed high compliance. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 39 (61%) participants in group A and 14 (42%) in group B. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [14%] participants in group A vs five [15%] in group B), anaemia (nine [14%] vs one [3%]), fatigue (three [5%] vs four [12%]), and diarrhoea (seven [11%] vs one [3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 16 (25%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B, and these were mDCF-related in seven (11%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B. Atezolizumab-related serious adverse events occurred in nine (14%) participants in group A, including grade 2 infusion-related reaction in three (5%), grade 3 infection in two (3%), and grade 2 colitis, grade 3 acute kidney injury, grade 3 sarcoidosis, and a grade 4 platelet count decrease each in one participant (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Despite a higher incidence of adverse events, combining atezolizumab with mDCF is feasible, with similar dose intensity in both groups, although the primary efficacy endpoint was not met. The predictive value of a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater now needs to be confirmed in future studies. FUNDING: GERCOR, Roche.

Attributes for a discrete-choice experiment on preferences of patients for oncology pharmacy consultations.

PURPOSE: To ensure the safe use of oral anticancer drugs, oncology pharmacy consultations (OPCs) have been established in France. They are conditioned by the needs, expectations, and involvement of the patients in their care. Thus, it is essential to elicit their preferences. The discrete-choice experiment (DCE) is a method recommended by the ISPOR for such a task. The "selection and validation of attributes and their values" step is fundamental in this process. In this context, the aim of this study was to present our research approach to identify and validate the attributes that characterize an OPC and their values. METHODS: Due to the lack of relevant published data in the literature, the focus-group method was used in accordance with good research practices for the application of conjoint-analysis of the ISPOR. The two-round Delphi method was used to validate the attributes and their values identified by the focus-group method. RESULTS: The focus-group method enabled identification of nine attributes. Thirty-seven healthcare professionals at a national level, including 30 pharmacists and seven physicians, were selected to take part in the Delphi procedure. Seven attributes (frequency, planification, operation mode, duration, content, written support, and report) and their values were thus validated. CONCLUSION: Based on these results, the next step will be to elicit patient preferences for OPCs and to then shed light on the issues of pharmaceutical support for patients by comparing their preferences with those of informal caregivers and, in particular, those of the healthcare professionals involved in their care.

French healthcare students and antibiotics: are they ready to promote their appropriate use?

Objectives: French healthcare students are required to carry out primary prevention interventions as part of the Healthcare Service by Healthcare Students (HSHS). The purpose of this study was to explore students' perceptions of preparedness to address the public's concerns about antibiotic use and how their perceptions changed after implementing their intervention. Methods: A questionnaire was sent twice during the 2020-2021 academic year to 920 multidisciplinary healthcare students (nursing, medicine, physiotherapy, pharmacy and midwifery students) enrolled in the HSHS in Franche-Comté (HSHS-FC). Results: This study included 870/920 students (94.6%). Medical and pharmacy students were the most concerned about the issue of antimicrobial resistance. Before enrollment in the HSHS-FC, 463 of the 870 students included (53.2%) reported having sufficient knowledge about antibiotics to lead preventive interventions, reaching 87.9% (58/66) for pharmacy students. Despite this relative lack of knowledge, 77.2% of students felt confident to promote the appropriate use of antibiotics in the healthcare service context. This rate ranged from 68.0% (17/25) for midwifery students to 93.9% (62/66) for pharmacy students. Irrespective of the topic of the intervention, students significantly improved their knowledge and ability to promote antibiotic use after training in the HSHS-FC. Conclusions: Theoretical prerequisites and a feeling of concern vary widely depending on the curriculum. The HSHS-FC promotes multidisciplinary collaboration and can contribute to improving students' knowledge. The support of an expert in antimicrobial resistance may be necessary to validate the content of the interventions proposed by the students.