Treatment registry for outcomes in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (TRUMPET): a methodology for real-world evidence and research.

AIM: This study seeks to improve the understanding of treatment patterns and associated health-related quality of life (HRQoL), clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization in US patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). PATIENTS & METHODS: Treatment Registry for Outcomes in CRPC Patients (TRUMPET) is a US-based, prospective, observational multicenter registry (NCT02380274) involving patients with CRPC and their caregivers. Patients initiating their first active treatment course will be enrolled from urology and medical oncology practices, with data captured up to 4 years. RESULTS: Information on prescribing patterns, HRQoL, clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization will be collected. CONCLUSION: TRUMPET will enable scientific understanding of disease management in terms of HRQoL, clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization in clinical practice for patients with CRPC.

Consistency in seroma contouring for partial breast radiotherapy: impact of guidelines.

PURPOSE: Inconsistencies in contouring target structures can undermine the precision of conformal radiation therapy (RT) planning and compromise the validity of clinical trial results. This study evaluated the impact of guidelines on consistency in target volume contouring for partial breast RT planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Guidelines for target volume definition for partial breast radiation therapy (PBRT) planning were developed by members of the steering committee for a pilot trial of PBRT using conformal external beam planning. In phase 1, delineation of the breast seroma in 5 early-stage breast cancer patients was independently performed by a "trained" cohort of four radiation oncologists who were provided with these guidelines and an "untrained" cohort of four radiation oncologists who contoured without guidelines. Using automated planning software, the seroma target volume (STV) was expanded into a clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV) for each oncologist. Means and standard deviations were calculated, and two-tailed t tests were used to assess differences between the "trained" and "untrained" cohorts. In phase 2, all eight radiation oncologists were provided with the same contouring guidelines, and were asked to delineate the seroma in five new cases. Data were again analyzed to evaluate consistency between the two cohorts. RESULTS: The "untrained" cohort contoured larger seroma volumes and had larger CTVs and PTVs compared with the "trained" cohort in three of five cases. When seroma contouring was performed after review of contouring guidelines, the differences in the STVs, CTVs, and PTVs were no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Guidelines can improve consistency among radiation oncologists performing target volume delineation for PBRT planning.

Randomized phase III trial of maintenance bevacizumab with or without pemetrexed after first-line induction with bevacizumab, cisplatin, and pemetrexed in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: AVAPERL (MO22089).

PURPOSE: Maintenance therapy is associated with improved survival in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but few studies have compared active agents in this setting. AVAPERL evaluated the safety and efficacy of bevacizumab with or without pemetrexed as continuation maintenance treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC received first-line bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg, cisplatin 75 mg/m(2), and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks for four cycles. Those achieving response or stable disease were randomly assigned at a ratio of 1:1 to maintenance bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg or bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) after random assignment. RESULTS: In total, 376 patients received induction treatment, 71.9% achieved disease control, and 67.3% were randomly assigned to maintenance therapy, with 125 and 128 receiving single-agent bevacizumab and bevacizumab plus pemetrexed treatment, respectively. At a median follow-up of 8.1 months, PFS from random assignment was significantly improved in the bevacizumab plus pemetrexed arm (median, 3.7 v 7.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.66; P < .001) per a stratified model. The PFS benefit extended across age, performance status, smoking history, and induction response (stable disease v partial response) subgroups. Any grade, grade ≥ 3, and serious adverse events occurred more often with bevacizumab plus pemetrexed maintenance. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: In an unselected population of patients with nonsquamous NSCLC who had achieved disease control with platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, bevacizumab plus pemetrexed maintenance was associated with a significant PFS benefit compared with bevacizumab alone. The combination was well tolerated.

Randomized phase IIIb trial evaluating the continuation of bevacizumab beyond disease progression in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer after first-line treatment with bevacizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy: treatment rationale and protocol dynamics of the AvaALL (MO22097) trial.

We present the treatment rationale and study design of the AvaALL (MO22097; ClinicalTrials: NCT01351415) trial, a multicenter, open-label, randomized, two-arm, phase IIIb study. Patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose disease has progressed after four to six cycles of first-line treatment with bevacizumab plus a platinum-based doublet and a minimum of two cycles of bevacizumab (monotherapy) maintenance treatment will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to one of two study arms. Patients treated on arm A will receive bevacizumab 7.5 or 15 mg/kg intravenously (I.V.) on day 1, every 21 days plus, investigator's choice of agents indicated for use in second-line (limited to pemetrexed, docetaxel, or erlotinib) and subsequent lines of treatment. Patients treated on arm B, will receive investigator's choice of agents alone indicated for use in second-line and subsequent lines of treatment, but no further bevacizumab treatment. The primary endpoint of this study is overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints include the 6-month, 12-month, and 18-month OS rates, progression-free survival, and time to progression at second and third progressive disease (PD), response rate, disease control rates, and duration of response at second and third PD. Additionally, efficacy in the subgroup of patients with adenocarcinoma, and the safety of bevacizumab treatment across multiple lines of treatment will be assessed. Exploratory objectives include assessment of the quality of life through multiple lines of treatment, comparison of the efficacy between Asian and non-Asian patients, and correlation of biomarkers with efficacy outcomes, disease response, and adverse events.

Follicular lymphoma in the United States: first report of the national LymphoCare study.

PURPOSE: Optimal therapy of follicular lymphoma (FL) is not defined. We analyzed a large prospective cohort study to identify current demographics and patterns of care of FL in the United States. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National LymphoCare Study is a multicenter, longitudinal, observational study designed to collect information on treatment regimens and outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed FL in the United States. Patients were enrolled between 2004 and 2007. There is no study-specific prescribed treatment regimen or intervention. RESULTS: Two thousand seven hundred twenty-eight subjects were enrolled at 265 sites, including the 80% of patients enrolled from nonacademic sites. Using the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI), three distinct groups independent of histologic grade could be defined. Initial therapeutic strategy was: observation, 17.7%; rituximab monotherapy, 13.9%; clinical trial 6.1%; radiation therapy, 5.6%; chemotherapy only, 3.2%; chemotherapy plus rituximab, 51.9%. Chemotherapy plus rituximab regimens were: rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, 55.0%; rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone, 23.1%; rituximab plus fludarabine based, 15.5%; other, 6.4%. The choice to initiate therapy rather than observe was associated with age, FLIPI, stage, and grade (P < .01). Significant differences in treatment (P < .01) across regions of the United States were noted. Contrary to practice guidelines, treatment of stage I FL frequently omits radiation therapy. CONCLUSION: Widely disparate therapeutic approaches are utilized for FL. Initial therapy is deferred in a small subset of patients. There is no single standard of care for the treatment of de novo FL, although antibody use is ubiquitous when therapy is initiated. These disparate approaches to the initial care of patients with FL render a heterogeneous group of patients at relapse.