High-Dose Glucocorticoids for the Treatment of Sudden Hearing Loss.

BACKGROUND: Systemic glucocorticoids are commonly used for primary therapy of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL). However, the comparative effectiveness and risk profiles of high-dose over lower-dose regimens remain unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with sudden hearing loss of greater than or equal to 50 dB within 7 days from onset to receive either 5 days of high-dose intravenous prednisolone at 250 mg/d (HD-Pred), 5 days of high-dose oral dexamethasone at 40 mg/d (HD-Dex), or, as a control, 5 days of oral prednisolone (Pred-Control) at 60 mg/d followed by 5 days of tapering doses. The primary outcome was the change in hearing threshold (pure tone average) in the three most affected contiguous frequencies from baseline to day 30. Secondary outcomes included speech understanding, tinnitus, communication competence, quality of life, hypertension, and insulin resistance. RESULTS: A total of 325 patients were randomly assigned. Mean change in 3PTAmost affected hearing threshold from baseline to 30 days was 34.2 dB (95% CI, 28.4 to 40.0) in the HD-Pred group, 41.4 dB (95% CI, 35.6 to 47.2) in the HD-Dex group, and 41.0 dB (95% CI, 35.2 to 46.8) in the Pred-Control group (P=0.09 for analysis of variance). There were more adverse events related to trial medication in the HD-Pred (n=73) and HD-Dex (n=76) groups than in the Pred-Control group (n=46). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic high-dose glucocorticoid therapy was not superior to a lower-dose regimen in patients with ISSNHL, and it was associated with a higher risk of side effects. (Funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research [BMBF]; EudraCT number, 2015­002602­36.)

Long-term efficacy of the peptide-based COVID-19 T cell activator CoVac-1 in healthy adults.

OBJECTIVES: T cell immunity is key for the control of viral infections including SARS-CoV-2, in particular with regard to immune memory and protection against arising genetic variants. METHODS: We recently evaluated a peptide-based SARS-CoV-2 T cell activator termed CoVac-1 in a first-in-human trial in healthy adults. Here, we report on long-term safety and efficacy data of CoVac-1 until month 12. RESULTS: CoVac-1 is well tolerated without long-term immune-related side effects and induces long-lasting anti-viral T cell responses in 100% of study participants, with potent expandability of clusters of differentiation (CD4+) and CD8+ T cells targeting multiple different CoVac-1 T cell epitopes. T cell responses were associated with stronger injection site reaction. Beyond induction of T cell immunity, 89% of subjects developed CoVac-1-specific immunoglobulin G antibodies which associated with the intensity of the T cell response, indicating that CoVac-1-specific CD4+ T cells support the induction of B-cell responses. Vaccination with approved COVID-19 vaccines boosted CoVac-1-specific T cell responses. Overall, a low SARS-CoV-2 infection rate (8.3%) was observed. CONCLUSION: Together, a single application of CoVac-1 elicits long-lived and broad SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity, which further supports the current evaluation of our T cell activator in patients with congenital or acquired B-cell defects.

Phase I/II trial of a peptide-based COVID-19 T-cell activator in patients with B-cell deficiency.

T-cell immunity is central for control of COVID-19, particularly in patients incapable of mounting antibody responses. CoVac-1 is a peptide-based T-cell activator composed of SARS-CoV-2 epitopes with documented favorable safety profile and efficacy in terms of SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell response. We here report a Phase I/II open-label trial (NCT04954469) in 54 patients with congenital or acquired B-cell deficiency receiving one subcutaneous CoVac-1 dose. Immunogenicity in terms of CoVac-1-induced T-cell responses and safety are the primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. No serious or grade 4 CoVac-1-related adverse events have been observed. Expected local granuloma formation has been observed in 94% of study subjects, whereas systemic reactogenicity has been mild or absent. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses have been induced in 86% of patients and are directed to multiple CoVac-1 peptides, not affected by any current Omicron variants and mediated by multifunctional T-helper 1 CD4+ T cells. CoVac-1-induced T-cell responses have exceeded those directed to the spike protein after mRNA-based vaccination of B-cell deficient patients and immunocompetent COVID-19 convalescents with and without seroconversion. Overall, our data show that CoVac-1 induces broad and potent T-cell responses in patients with B-cell/antibody deficiency with a favorable safety profile, which warrants advancement to pivotal Phase III safety and efficacy evaluation. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04954469.

[Hypnotherapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression - Results from the three and a half year follow-up of a randomized controlled non-inferiority study]. / Hypnotherapie und Verhaltenstherapie bei Depressionen ­ Ergebnisse der Dreieinhalb-Jahres-Katamnese einer randomisiert-kontrollierten Nicht-Unterlegenheitsstudie.

OBJECTIVE: The scientific approval of hypnotherapy for certain mental disorders is still not confirmed. In a randomized-controlled study comparing the efficacy of hypnotherapy (HT) with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for mild to moderate depressive episodes, a non-inferiority of HT compared to CBT could be found. The aim of this study was to examine depressive symptomatology in the long-term course three and a half years after end of the treatment. METHODS: A total of 152 randomized patients received outpatient individual psychotherapy with 16 to 20 sessions over a period of six months. All were invited to participate in a follow-up three and a half years after the end of treatment where depressive symptoms were assessed via self- and clinician-ratings. In the per-protocol (PP) analysis, only those with available data were included, but a comparison of characteristics was made with individuals without participation in the follow-up survey. An additional intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was conducted with multiple imputed data for missing data. RESULTS: A total of 71 subjects (46.7%) participated in the follow-up. The noninferiority in the percentage symptom reduction assessed with the clinician-rating of HT compared with CBT was confirmed in the PP and the ITT sample. The symptom improvement in self- and clinician-rating by the end of therapy persisted during the follow-up. Response rates and remission rates for both self- and clinician-ratings are reported. CONCLUSION: In this study, indications were found that HT was noninferior to CBT in the treatment of depression, even in the long term. Further studies should examine the efficacy of HT in larger multicenter samples and identify predictors of individual treatment success.

Long-Term Outcomes of Depression Treatment With Hypnotherapy or Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.

ABSTRACT: In a recent randomized controlled trial of mild to moderate depression, hypnotherapy (HT) was noninferior to cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) after 6 months of outpatient treatment. In the present article, we extended the results in a secondary analysis and investigated how HT compares with CBT 1) during the course of the self-rated depressive symptoms throughout the 12-month follow-ups, 2) with regard to the rates of full remission, and 3) for the time to remission after treatment. Of the 152 randomized patients with current depression, 136 were available for the follow-up analyses. The course of self-rated depressive symptoms during follow-ups was analyzed with linear mixed-effects models. Time to a full remission, defined as eight consecutive weeks without depression, was compared between groups in a survival analysis. The self-reported depressive symptoms could be maintained on a low symptom level during the 12-month follow-up for both HT and CBT. Overall, both treatments achieved comparably high long-term remission rates of 73% after a median of 30 weeks. Outpatient psychotherapy with HT achieved good long-term results mostly comparable to CBT.

Adjuvant Docetaxel in Node-Negative Breast Cancer Patients: A Randomized Trial of AGO-Breast Study Group, German Breast Group, and EORTC-Pathobiology Group.

BACKGROUND: In node-negative breast cancer (NNBC), a high risk of recurrence is determined by clinico-pathological or tumor-biological assessment. Taxanes may improve adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: NNBC 3-Europe, the first randomized phase-3 trial in node-negative breast cancer (BC) with tumor-biological risk assessment, recruited 4146 node-negative breast cancer patients from 2002 to 2009 in 153 centers. Risk assessment was performed by clinico-pathological factors (43%) or biomarkers (uPA/PAI-1, urokinase-type plasminogen activator/its inhibitor PAI-1). High-risk patients received six courses 5-fluorouracil (500 mg/m2), epirubicin (100 mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2) (FEC), or three courses FEC followed by three courses docetaxel 100 mg/m2 (FEC-Doc). Primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population, 1286 patients had received FEC-Doc, and 1255 received FEC. Median follow-up was 45 months. Tumor characteristics were equally distributed; 90.6% of tested tumors had high uPA/PAI-1-concentrations. Planned courses were given in 84.4% (FEC-Doc) and 91.5% (FEC). Five-year-DFS was 93.2% (95% C.I. 91.1-94.8) with FEC-Doc and 93.7% (91.7-95.3) with FEC. Five-year-overall survival was 97.0% (95.4-98.0) for FEC-Doc and 96.6% % (94.9-97.8) for FEC. CONCLUSIONS: With adequate adjuvant chemotherapy, even high-risk node-negative breast cancer patients have an excellent prognosis. Docetaxel did not further reduce the rate of early recurrences and led to significantly more treatment discontinuations.

Peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) in peritoneal metastasis: how many biopsies should be examined?

Objectives: The four-tied peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) is increasingly used to evaluate the response of peritoneal metastases (PM) to chemotherapy. The minimal number of peritoneal biopsies needed for PRGS determination remains unclear. Methods: A prospective cohort of 89 PM patients treated with 210 pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) cycles was investigated. Four biopsies from every abdominal quadrant were recommended. Histological tumor response was defined as a stable or decreasing mean PRGS between therapy cycles, progression increasing. We compared the diagnostic uncertainty induced by missing biopsies to the histological response. Results: A total of 49 patients had at least two PIPAC and were eligible for therapy response assessment. Mean PRGS decreased from 2.04 (CI 5-95% 1.85-2.27) to 1.79 (CI 5-95% 1.59-2.01), p=0.14, as a proof of therapy effectiveness. 35 (71.4%) patients had a stable or decreasing PRGS (therapy response), 14 (28.6%) a PRGS increase (disease progression). Histology showed agreement between four biopsies in 42/210 laparoscopies (20%), between ≥3 biopsies in 103 (49%), and between ≥2 biopsies in 169 laparoscopies (81%). Mean loss of information with one missing biopsy was 0.11 (95% CI=0.13) PRGS points, with two missing biopsies 0.18 (95% CI 0.21). In 9/49 patients (18.3%), the loss of information with one less biopsy exceeded the change in PRGS under therapy. Conclusions: A minimum of three biopsies is needed to diagnose PM progression with an accuracy superior to 80%. Missing biopsies often result in a false diagnosis of tumor progression.

Tocilizumab for the Treatment of Familial Mediterranean Fever-A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase II Study.

Background: The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the IL-6 receptor antibody Tocilizumab (TCZ) in the treatment of Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF). Methods: This was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase II trial in adult patients with active FMF and an inadequate response or intolerance to colchicine (crFMF). The physician's global assessment of disease activity (PGA), based on a five-point scale for six symptoms, was used as a clinical score, which had to be >2 at screening, together with elevated c-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and serum amyloid A (SAA) levels, to be eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either receive monthly TCZ or a placebo over a period of 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the number of patients achieving an adequate response to treatment at week 16, defined as a PGA of ≤2 and normalized ESR or CRP and normalized SAA. Results: We randomized 25 patients with a median age of 31 years. At week 16, an adequate treatment response was achieved by two patients in the TCZ and none of the patients in the placebo arm (p = 0.089). SAA levels normalized with TCZ, but not with the placebo (p = 0.015). Conclusion: In this first randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with active crFMF, more patients in the TCZ arm experienced a response to treatment in comparison to those receiving the placebo. As the prevention of amyloidosis is a major treatment goal in FMF, the normalization of SAA in TCZ-treated patients is essential. These findings have to be confirmed in a larger trial.

Intratympanic corticosteroids for sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is common, and defined as a sudden decrease in sensorineural hearing sensitivity of unknown aetiology. Systemic corticosteroids are widely used, however their value remains unclear. Intratympanic injections of corticosteroids have become increasingly common in the treatment of ISSNHL. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intratympanic corticosteroids in people with ISSNHL. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL (2021, Issue 9); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials (search date 23 September 2021). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with ISSNHL and follow-up of over a week. Intratympanic corticosteroids were given as primary or secondary treatment (after failure of systemic therapy). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods, including GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcome was change in hearing threshold with pure tone audiometry. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of people whose hearing improved, final hearing threshold, speech audiometry, frequency-specific hearing changes and adverse effects. MAIN RESULTS: We included 30 studies, comprising 2133 analysed participants. Some studies had more than two treatment arms and were therefore relevant to several comparisons. Studies investigated intratympanic corticosteroids as either primary (initial) therapy or secondary (rescue) therapy after failure of initial treatment. 1. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus systemic corticosteroids as primary therapy We identified 16 studies (1108 participants). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no improvement in the change in hearing threshold (mean difference (MD) -5.93 dB better, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.61 to -4.26; 10 studies; 701 participants; low-certainty). We found little to no difference in the proportion of participants whose hearing was improved (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.12; 14 studies; 972 participants; moderate-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no difference in the final hearing threshold (MD -3.31 dB, 95% CI -6.16 to -0.47; 7 studies; 516 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may increase the number of people who experience vertigo or dizziness (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.54; 1 study; 250 participants; low-certainty) and probably increases the number of people with ear pain (RR 15.68, 95% CI 6.22 to 39.49; 2 studies; 289 participants; moderate-certainty). It also resulted in persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 3.9%; 3 studies; 359 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo/dizziness at the time of injection (1% to 21%, 3 studies; 197 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (10.5% to 27.1%; 2 studies; 289 participants; low-certainty). 2. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as primary therapy We identified 10 studies (788 participants). Combined therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -8.55 dB better, 95% CI -12.48 to -4.61; 6 studies; 435 participants; low-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain as to whether combined therapy changes the proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.41; 10 studies; 788 participants; very low-certainty). Combined therapy may result in slightly lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds but the evidence is very uncertain, and it is not clear whether the change would be important to patients (MD -9.11 dB, 95% CI -16.56 to -1.67; 3 studies; 194 participants; very low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received combined therapy. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 5.5%; 5 studies; 474 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 0% to 8.1%; 4 studies; 341 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (13.5%; 1 study; 73 participants; very low-certainty).  3. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus no treatment or placebo as secondary therapy We identified seven studies (279 participants). Intratympanic therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -9.07 dB better, 95% CI -11.47 to -6.66; 7 studies; 280 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 5.55, 95% CI 2.89 to 10.68; 6 studies; 232 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds (MD -11.09 dB, 95% CI -17.46 to -4.72; 5 studies; 203 participants; low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received intratympanic injection. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 4.2%; 5 studies; 185 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 6.7% to 33%; 3 studies; 128 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (0%; 1 study; 44 participants; very low-certainty).  4. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as secondary therapy We identified one study with 76 participants. Change in hearing threshold was not reported. Combined therapy may result in a higher proportion with hearing improvement, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 2.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 4.55; very low-certainty). Adverse effects were poorly reported with only data for persistent tympanic membrane perforation (rate 8.1%, very low-certainty). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Most of the evidence in this review is low- or very low-certainty, therefore it is likely that further studies may change our conclusions.   For primary therapy, intratympanic corticosteroids may have little or no effect compared with systemic corticosteroids. There may be a slight benefit from combined treatment when compared with systemic treatment alone, but the evidence is uncertain. For secondary therapy, there is low-certainty evidence that intratympanic corticosteroids, when compared to no treatment or placebo, may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved, but may only have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold. It is very uncertain whether there is additional benefit from combined treatment over systemic steroids alone. Although adverse effects were poorly reported, the different risk profiles of intratympanic treatment (including tympanic membrane perforation, pain and dizziness/vertigo) and systemic treatment (for example, blood glucose problems) should be considered when selecting appropriate treatment.

[Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantations in Germany]. / Einfluss der Coronapandemie auf die Leberchirurgie und Lebertransplantationen in Deutschland.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to restrictions in surgical care worldwide and therefore also posed new challenges to liver surgery. The respective procedures often entail high perioperative risks and resource requirements. However, the indication for liver surgery is frequently without alternatives. To date, there is little knowledge about the impact of the pandemic on liver surgery in Germany. METHODS: A retrospective data analysis of liver surgery procedures in Germany as well as transplantations was conducted. Evaluations were based on procedure codes recorded between 2010 and 2020 according to diagnosis-related groups (DRG) by the Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) and data from the German Organ Procurement Organization (Deutsche Stiftung Organtransplantation; DSO). RESULTS: According to DRG procedure codes relating to liver surgery recorded between 2010 and 2020 in Germany, the annual fluctuation for the first year of the pandemic 2020 remained comparable to previous years. Furthermore, the development of post-mortem liver transplantations as well as living liver donations remained stable in Germany in 2020 and 2021. CONCLUSIONS: The number of liver surgery procedures in Germany was subject to a dynamic development until 2020, without apparent changes in the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The most frequently performed liver procedures, as well as liver transplantations, remained stable with respect to their annually recorded numbers. Publication of data regarding procedures in liver surgery and transplantation in 2021 need to be awaited and analyzed to evaluate whether the observations presented in this article prove stable any further.

Efficacy and safety of systemic, high-dose glucocorticoid therapy for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss : Study protocol for a three-armed, randomized, triple-blind, multicenter trial (HODOKORT).

BACKGROUND: Systemic glucocorticosteroids ("steroids") are widely used worldwide as a standard of care for primary therapy of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSHL). The German ISSHL guideline recommends high-dose steroids without evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and refers solely to retrospective cohort studies. This RCT aims to assess the efficacy (improvement in hearing) and safety (especially systemic side effects) of high-dose steroids versus standard of care (standard dose systemic steroids) for the treatment of unilateral ISSHL, when given as a primary therapy. METHODS: The study is designed as a multicenter (approximately 40 centers), randomized, triple-blind, three-armed, parallel group, clinical trial with 312 adult patients. The interventions consist of 5 days of 250 mg/day intravenous prednisolone (intervention 1) + oral placebo, or 5 days of 40 mg/day oral dexamethasone (intervention 2) + intravenous placebo. The control intervention consists of 60 mg oral prednisolone for 5 days followed by five tapering doses + intravenous placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint is the change in hearing threshold in the three most affected contiguous frequencies between 0.25 and 8 kHz 1 month after ISSHL. Secondary endpoints include further measures of hearing improvement including speech audiometry, tinnitus, quality of life, blood pressure, and altered glucose tolerance. DISCUSSION: There is an unmet medical need for an effective medical therapy of ISSHL. Although sensorineural hearing impairment can be partially compensated by hearing aids or cochlear implants (CI), generic hearing is better than using hearing aids or CIs. Since adverse effects of a short course of high-dose systemic corticosteroids have not been documented with good evidence, the trial will improve knowledge on possible side effects in the different treatment arms with a focus on hyperglycemia and hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT (European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database) Nr. 2015-002602-36; Sponsor code: KKSH-127.

A COVID-19 peptide vaccine for the induction of SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity.

T cell immunity is central for the control of viral infections. CoVac-1 is a peptide-based vaccine candidate, composed of SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes derived from various viral proteins1,2, combined with the Toll-like receptor 1/2 agonist XS15 emulsified in Montanide ISA51 VG, aiming to induce profound SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity to combat COVID-19. Here we conducted a phase I open-label trial, recruiting 36 participants aged 18-80 years, who received a single subcutaneous CoVac-1 vaccination. The primary end point was safety analysed until day 56. Immunogenicity in terms of CoVac-1-induced T cell response was analysed as the main secondary end point until day 28 and in the follow-up until month 3. No serious adverse events and no grade 4 adverse events were observed. Expected local granuloma formation was observed in all study participants, whereas systemic reactogenicity was absent or mild. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses targeting multiple vaccine peptides were induced in all study participants, mediated by multifunctional T helper 1 CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. CoVac-1-induced IFNγ T cell responses persisted in the follow-up analyses and surpassed those detected after SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as after vaccination with approved vaccines. Furthermore, vaccine-induced T cell responses were unaffected by current SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Together, CoVac-1 showed a favourable safety profile and induced broad, potent and variant of concern-independent T cell responses, supporting the presently ongoing evaluation in a phase II trial for patients with B cell or antibody deficiency.

The SOX2 Status of Disseminated Tumor Cells in Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Detection of disseminated tumor cells (DTCs) after systemic treatment predicts poor prognosis in breast cancer patients. The aim of our study was to assess the expression of stem-cell marker SOX2 on DTCs and in the primary tumor of patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 170 DTC-positive patients after NAT an additional slide of bone marrow aspirate was stained by double immunofluorescence to detect SOX2-positive DTCs. The SOX2 status of the primary tumor was assessed using the same antibody. RESULTS: The SOX2-status of DTCs was determined in 62 patients and 20 of those (32%) had SOX2 positive DTCs. The SOX2 status of DTCs was not associated with any of the clinicopathological factors. A total of 36% of the patients with a SOX2-negative tumor showed SOX2-positive persistent DTCs. CONCLUSION: SOX2-positive DTCs can be detected in breast cancer patients after NAT, even in patients with SOX2-negative primary tumors. This suggests that these populations may have evolved independently of each other.

A Prospective, Phase I/II, Open-Label Pilot Trial to Assess the Safety of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy After Oncological Resection of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a common fatal disease with unfavorable prognosis, even after oncological resection. To improve survival, adding hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been suggested. Whether HIPEC entails disproportional short-term mortality is unknown and a prospectively determined adverse events profile is lacking. Since both pancreatic resection and HIPEC may relevantly influence morbidity and mortality, this uncontrolled single-arm, open-label, phase I/II pilot trial was designed to assess the 30-day mortality rate, treatment feasibility, and adverse events connected with HIPEC after oncological pancreatic surgery. METHODS: This trial recruited patients scheduled for PDAC resection. A sample size of 16 patients receiving study interventions was estimated to establish a predefined margin of treatment-associated short-term mortality with a power of > 80%. Patients achieving complete macroscopic resection received HIPEC with gemcitabine administered at 1000 mg/m2 body surface area heated to 42 °C for 1 hour. RESULTS: Within 30 days after intervention, no patient died or experienced any adverse events higher than grade 3 that were related to HIPEC. Furthermore, treatment-related adverse events were prospectively documented and categorized as expected or unexpected. This trial supports that the actual mortality rate after PDAC resection and HIPEC is below 10%. HIPEC treatment proved feasible in 89% of patients allocated to intervention. Pancreatic fistulas, as key complications after pancreas surgery, occurred in 3/13 patients under risk. CONCLUSION: Combined pancreas resection and gemcitabine HIPEC proved feasible and safe, with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Based on these results, further clinical evaluation can be justified. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02863471 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Efficacy of hypnotherapy compared to cognitive behavioral therapy for mild to moderate depression - Results of a randomized controlled rater-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Methodologically well-designed RCTs concerning the efficacy of Hypnotherapy in the treatment of Major Depression are lacking. The aim of this study was to determine whether Hypnotherapy (HT) is not inferior to Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), the gold-standard psychotherapy, in the percentage reduction of depressive symptoms, assessed in mild to moderate Major Depression (MD). METHODS: This study reports the main results of a monocentric two-armed randomized-controlled rater-blind clinical trial. A total of 152 patients with MD were randomized to either CBT or HT receiving outpatient individual psychotherapy with 16 to 20 sessions for the duration of six months. The primary outcome was the mean percentage improvement in depressive symptoms assessed with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) before and after treatment. RESULTS: The difference in the mean percentage symptom reduction between HT and CBT was 2.8 (95% CI=-9.85 to 15.44) in the Intention-to-treat sample and 4.0 (95% CI=-9.27 to 17.27) in the Per Protocol sample (N=134). Concerning the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -16.4, both results confirm the non-inferiority of HT to CBT. The results for the follow-ups six and twelve months after the end of the treatment support the primary results. LIMITATIONS: For ethical reasons the trial did not include a control group without treatment; therefore we can only indirectly conclude that both treatment conditions are effective. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate that HT was not inferior to CBT in MD, while employing rigorous methodological standards.

Termination rates and histological reclassification of active surveillance patients with low- and early intermediate-risk prostate cancer: results of the PREFERE trial.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance (AS) strategies for patients with low- and early intermediate-risk prostate cancer are still not consistently defined. Within a controlled randomized trial, active surveillance was compared to other treatment options for patients with prostate cancer. Aim of this analysis was to report on termination rates of patients treated with AS including different grade groups. METHODS: A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy, active surveillance, external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy was performed from 2013 to 2016 and included 345 patients with low- and early intermediate-risk prostate cancer (ISUP grade groups 1 and 2). The trial was prematurely stopped due to slow accrual. A total of 130 patients were treated with active surveillance. Among them, 42 patients were diagnosed with intermediate-risk PCA. Reference pathology and AS quality control were performed throughout. RESULTS: After a median follow-up time of 18.8 months, 73 out of the 130 patients (56%) terminated active surveillance. Of these, 56 (77%) patients were histologically reclassified at the time of rebiopsy, including 35% and 60% of the grade group 1 and 2 patients, respectively. No patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at the time of reclassification had radical prostatectomy specimens ≥ grade group 3. CONCLUSION: In this prospectively analyzed subcohort of patients with AS and conventional staging within a randomized trial, the 2-year histological reclassification rates were higher than those previously reported. Active surveillance may not be based on conventional staging alone, and patients with grade group 2 cancers may be recommended for active surveillance in carefully controlled trials only.

Methylome analyses of three glioblastoma cohorts reveal chemotherapy sensitivity markers within DDR genes.

BACKGROUND: Gliomas evade current therapies through primary and acquired resistance and the effect of temozolomide is mainly restricted to methylguanin-O6-methyltransferase promoter (MGMT) promoter hypermethylated tumors. Further resistance markers are largely unknown and would help for better stratification. METHODS: Clinical data and methylation profiles from the NOA-08 (104, elderly glioblastoma) and the EORTC 26101 (297, glioblastoma) studies and 398 patients with glioblastoma from the Heidelberg Neuro-Oncology center have been analyzed focused on the predictive effect of DNA damage response (DDR) gene methylation. Candidate genes were validated in vitro. RESULTS: Twenty-eight glioblastoma 5'-cytosine-phosphat-guanine-3' (CpGs) from 17 DDR genes negatively correlated with expression and were used together with telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) promoter mutations in further analysis. CpG methylation of DDR genes shows highest association with the mesenchymal (MES) and receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) II glioblastoma subgroup. MES tumors have lower tumor purity compared to RTK I and II subgroup tumors. CpG hypomethylation of DDR genes TP73 and PRPF19 correlated with worse patient survival in particular in MGMT promoter unmethylated tumors. TERT promoter mutation is most frequent in RTK I and II subtypes and associated with worse survival. Primary glioma cells show methylation patterns that resemble RTK I and II glioblastoma and long term established glioma cell lines do not match with glioblastoma subtypes. Silencing of selected resistance genes PRPF19 and TERT increase sensitivity to temozolomide in vitro. CONCLUSION: Hypomethylation of DDR genes and TERT promoter mutations is associated with worse tumor prognosis, dependent on the methylation cluster and MGMT promoter methylation status in IDH wild-type glioblastoma.

Superiority of temozolomide over radiotherapy for elderly patients with RTK II methylation class, MGMT promoter methylated malignant astrocytoma.

BACKGROUND: O6-methylguanine DNA-methyl transferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status is predictive for alkylating chemotherapy, but there are non-benefiting subgroups. METHODS: This is the long-term update of NOA-08 (NCT01502241), which compared efficacy and safety of radiotherapy (RT, n = 176) and temozolomide (TMZ, n = 193) at 7/14 days in patients >65 years old with anaplastic astrocytoma or glioblastoma. DNA methylation patterns and copy number variations were assessed in the biomarker cohort of 104 patients and in an independent cohort of 188 patients treated with RT+TMZ-containing regimens in Heidelberg. RESULTS: In the full NOA-08 cohort, median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 [7.0-10.0] months for TMZ treatment versus 9.4 [8.1-10.4] months for RT; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.93 (95% CI: 0.76-1.15) of TMZ versus RT. Median event-free survival (EFS) [3.4 (3.2-4.1) months vs 4.6 (4.2-5.0) months] did not differ, with HR = 1.02 (0.83-1.25). Patients with MGMT methylated tumors had markedly longer OS and EFS when treated with TMZ (18.4 [13.9-24.4] mo and 8.5 [6.9-13.3] mo) versus RT (9.6 [6.4-13.7] mo and 4.8 [4.3-6.2] mo, HR 0.44 [0.27-0.70], P < 0.001 for OS and 0.46 [0.29-0.73], P = 0.001 for EFS). Patients with glioblastomas of the methylation classes receptor tyrosine kinase I (RTK I) and mesenchymal subgroups lacked a prognostic impact of MGMT in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: MGMT promoter methylation is a strong predictive biomarker for the choice between RT and TMZ. It indicates favorable long-term outcome with initial TMZ monotherapy in patients with MGMT promoter-methylated tumors primarily in the RTK II subgroup.