Correlation between sentinel lymph node biopsy and non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in patients with cN0 breast carcinoma: comparison of invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have suggested that axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be avoided in women with cN0 breast cancer with 1-2 positive sentinel nodes (SLNs). However, these studies included only a few patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), so the validity of omitting ALDN in these patients remains controversial. This study compared the frequency of non-sentinel lymph nodes (non-SLNs) metastases in ILC and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). MATERIALS METHODS: Data relating to a total of 2583 patients with infiltrating breast carcinoma operated at our institution between 2012 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed: 2242 (86.8%) with IDC and 341 (13.2%) with ILC. We compared the incidence of metastasis to SLNs and non-SLNs between the ILC and IDC cohorts and examined factors that influenced non-SLNs metastasis. RESULTS: SLN biopsies were performed in 315 patients with ILC and 2018 patients with IDC. Metastases to the SLNs were found in 78/315 (24.8%) patients with ILC and in 460 (22.8%) patients with IDC (p = 0.31). The incidence of metastases to non-SLNs was significantly higher (p = 0.02) in ILC (52/78-66.7%) compared to IDC (207/460 - 45%). Multivariate analysis showed that ILC was the most influential predictive factor in predicting the presence of metastasis to non-SLNs. CONCLUSIONS: ILC cases have more non-SLNs metastases than IDC cases in SLN-positive patients. The ILC is essential for predicting non-SLN positivity in macro-metastases in the SLN. The option of omitting ALND in patients with ILC with 1-2 positive SLNs still requires further investigation.

White spots in pharmaceutical pipelines-EMA identifies potential areas of unmet medical needs.

Unmet medical needs are a priority for organizations such as the WHO and major public-private initiatives, such as Innovative Medicines Initiative, were established to speed up the development of better and safer medicines for patients. To assist such projects, the EMA in its 'Road Map to 2015' considered the mapping of unmet medical needs as a priority. This study has identified medical conditions for which the EMA could not identify developments in the pharmaceutical pipelines, that is, 'white spots'. Our analysis was made using external data sources as well as mining data of the EMA. The main areas for white spots were oncology, infectious diseases and certain psychiatric conditions. According to our data and a review of literature, in a number of these white spots, diagnostic tools may even be missing. The identification of those conditions will benefit stakeholders, including regulators, research funding bodies and patients' organizations.

Adaptive clinical trial designs for European marketing authorization: a survey of scientific advice letters from the European Medicines Agency.

BACKGROUND: Since the first methodological publications on adaptive study design approaches in the 1990s, the application of these approaches in drug development has raised increasing interest among academia, industry and regulators. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) as well as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have published guidance documents addressing the potentials and limitations of adaptive designs in the regulatory context. Since there is limited experience in the implementation and interpretation of adaptive clinical trials, early interaction with regulators is recommended. The EMA offers such interactions through scientific advice and protocol assistance procedures. METHODS: We performed a text search of scientific advice letters issued between 1 January 2007 and 8 May 2012 that contained relevant key terms. Letters containing questions related to adaptive clinical trials in phases II or III were selected for further analysis. From the selected letters, important characteristics of the proposed design and its context in the drug development program, as well as the responses of the Committee for Human Medicinal Products (CHMP)/Scientific Advice Working Party (SAWP), were extracted and categorized. For 41 more recent procedures (1 January 2009 to 8 May 2012), additional details of the trial design and the CHMP/SAWP responses were assessed. In addition, case studies are presented as examples. RESULTS: Over a range of 5½ years, 59 scientific advices were identified that address adaptive study designs in phase II and phase III clinical trials. Almost all were proposed as confirmatory phase III or phase II/III studies. The most frequently proposed adaptation was sample size reassessment, followed by dropping of treatment arms and population enrichment. While 12 (20%) of the 59 proposals for an adaptive clinical trial were not accepted, the great majority of proposals were accepted (15, 25%) or conditionally accepted (32, 54%). In the more recent 41 procedures, the most frequent concerns raised by CHMP/SAWP were insufficient justifications of the adaptation strategy, type I error rate control and bias. CONCLUSIONS: For the majority of proposed adaptive clinical trials, an overall positive opinion was given albeit with critical comments. Type I error rate control, bias and the justification of the design are common issues raised by the CHMP/SAWP.