Efficacy and Safety of Adagrasib plus Cetuximab in Patients with KRASG12C-Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Adagrasib, an irreversible, selective KRASG12C inhibitor, may be an effective treatment in KRASG12C-mutated colorectal cancer, particularly when combined with an anti-EGFR antibody. In this analysis of the KRYSTAL-1 trial, patients with previously treated KRASG12C-mutated unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer received adagrasib (600 mg twice daily) plus cetuximab. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review. Ninety-four patients received adagrasib plus cetuximab. With a median follow-up of 11.9 months, ORR was 34.0%, disease control rate was 85.1%, and median duration of response was 5.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2-7.6). Median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.7-7.4) and median overall survival was 15.9 months (95% CI, 11.8-18.8). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in all patients; grade 3-4 in 27.7% and no grade 5. No TRAEs led to adagrasib discontinuation. Exploratory analyses suggest circulating tumor DNA may identify features of response and acquired resistance. SIGNIFICANCE: Adagrasib plus cetuximab demonstrates promising clinical activity and tolerable safety in heavily pretreated patients with unresectable or metastatic KRASG12C-mutated colorectal cancer. These data support a potential new standard of care and highlight the significance of testing and identification of KRASG12C mutations in patients with colorectal cancer. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 897.

Operational Metrics for the ELAINE 2 Study Combining a Traditional Approach With a Just-in-TIME Model.

PURPOSE: There are numerous barriers to enrollment in oncology biomarker-driven studies. METHODS: The ELAINE 2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04432454) is an open-label phase 2 study of lasofoxifene combined with abemaciclib in patients with advanced or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer with an ESR1 mutation. ELAINE 2 opened clinical sites by using a Traditional approach, which activated a site before patient identification, and the Tempus TIME Trial network, which opened a site only after identifying an eligible patient. This manuscript presents the operational metrics comparing the Traditional and TIME Trial site data. RESULTS: The study enrolled patients over 34 weeks and 16 sites (six Traditional and 10 TIME Trial) participated. Duration for full clinical trial agreement execution for Traditional sites and TIME Trial sites averaged 200.5 (range, 142-257) and 7.6 days (range, 2-14), respectively. Institutional review board approval time for Traditional sites and TIME Trial sites was 27.5 (range, 12-71) and 3.0 days (range, 1-12), respectively. Duration from study activation to first consent was 33.3 (range, 18-58) and 8.8 days (range, 1-35) for Traditional and TIME Trial sites, respectively. The first patient on study was at a TIME Trial site 115 days before a Traditional site and the first seven patients enrolled were at TIME Trial sites. Traditional sites consented 23 and enrolled 16 patients, while TIME Trial sites consented 16 and enrolled 13. The trial enrolled 29 patients in 8.5 months with the anticipated enrollment duration being 12-18 months. CONCLUSION: The TIME Trial network opened earlier and enrolled the first study patients. These results demonstrate that the Just-in-TIME model, along with a Traditional model, can improve enrollment in biomarker-driven studies.

Bintrafusp Alfa, a Bifunctional Fusion Protein Targeting TGF-ß and PD-L1, in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Resistant or Refractory to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Bintrafusp alfa is a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of transforming growth factor beta receptor II (a TGF-ß "trap") fused to a human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody blocking programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1). We report the efficacy and safety in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that progressed following anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this expansion cohort of NCT02517398-a global, open-label, phase I trial-adults with advanced NSCLC that progressed following chemotherapy and was primary refractory or had acquired resistance to anti-PD-(L)1 treatment received intravenous bintrafusp alfa 1200 mg every 2 weeks until confirmed progression, unacceptable toxicity, or trial withdrawal. The primary endpoint was best overall response (by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 adjudicated by independent review committee); secondary endpoints included safety. RESULTS: Eighty-three eligible patients (62 [74.7%] treated with ≥3 prior therapies) received bintrafusp alfa. Four patients (3 primary refractory, 1 acquired resistant) had confirmed partial responses (objective response rate, 4.8%; 95% CI, 1.3%-11.9%), and 9 had stable disease. Tumor cell PD-L1 expression was not associated with response. Nineteen patients (22.9%) experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events, most commonly asthenia (3 [3.6%]) and fatigue, eczema, and pruritus (2 each [2.4%]). One patient had grade 4 amylase increased. One patient died during treatment for pneumonia before initiation of bintrafusp alfa. CONCLUSION: Although the primary endpoint was not met, bintrafusp alfa showed some clinical activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with heavily pretreated NSCLC, including prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Tumor responses occurred irrespective of whether disease was primary refractory or had acquired resistance to prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy.

Intravenous Cetirizine vs Intravenous Diphenhydramine for the Prevention of Hypersensitivity Infusion Reactions: Results of an Exploratory Phase 2 Study.

Pretreatment with antihistamines for the prevention of hypersensitivity infusion reactions is recommended for certain biologics and chemotherapies. Cetirizine is the first injectable second-generation antihistamine recently approved for acute urticaria. A randomized, exploratory phase 2 study evaluated intravenous (IV) cetirizine 10 mg versus IV diphenhydramine 50 mg as pretreatment in patients receiving an anti-CD20 agent or paclitaxel. In the overall population (N = 34) and an elderly subgroup (n = 21), IV cetirizine was as effective as IV diphenhydramine in preventing infusion reactions (primary outcome) and associated with less sedation at all time points, a shorter infusion center stay, and fewer treatment-related adverse events.

Eflapegrastim, a Long-Acting Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor for the Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia: Results of a Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: Eflapegrastim, a novel, long-acting recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF), consists of a rhG-CSF analog conjugated to a human IgG4 Fc fragment via a short polyethylene glycol linker. Preclinical and phase I and II pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic data showed increased potency for neutrophil counts for eflapegrastim versus pegfilgrastim. This open-label phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of eflapegrastim with pegfilgrastim for reducing the risk of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with early-stage breast cancer were randomized 1:1 to fixed-dose eflapegrastim 13.2 mg (3.6 mg G-CSF) or standard pegfilgrastim (6 mg G-CSF) following standard docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for 4 cycles. The primary objective was to demonstrate the noninferiority of eflapegrastim compared with pegfilgrastim in mean duration of severe neutropenia (DSN; grade 4) in cycle 1. RESULTS: Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to study arms (eflapegrastim, n = 196; pegfilgrastim, n = 210). The incidence of cycle 1 severe neutropenia was 16% (n = 31) for eflapegrastim versus 24% (n = 51) for pegfilgrastim, reducing the relative risk by 35% (p = .034). The difference in mean cycle 1 DSN (-0.148 day) met the primary endpoint of noninferiority (p < .0001) and also showed statistical superiority for eflapegrastim (p = .013). Noninferiority was maintained for the duration of treatment (all cycles, p < .0001), and secondary efficacy endpoints and safety results were also comparable for study arms. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate noninferiority and comparable safety for eflapegrastim at a lower G-CSF dose versus pegfilgrastim. The potential for increased potency of eflapegrastim to deliver improved clinical benefit warrants further clinical study in patients at higher risk for CIN. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) remains a significant clinical dilemma for oncology patients who are striving to complete their prescribed chemotherapy regimen. In a randomized, phase III trial comparing eflapegrastim to pegfilgrastim in the prevention of CIN, the efficacy of eflapegrastim was noninferior to pegfilgrastim and had comparable safety. Nevertheless, the risk of CIN remains a great concern for patients undergoing chemotherapy, as the condition frequently results in chemotherapy delays, dose reductions, and treatment discontinuations.

Development of 2 Bromodomain and Extraterminal Inhibitors With Distinct Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Profiles for the Treatment of Advanced Malignancies.

PURPOSE: Bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) proteins are key epigenetic transcriptional regulators, inhibition of which may suppress oncogene expression. We report results from 2 independent first-in-human phase 1/2 dose-escalation and expansion, safety and tolerability studies of BET inhibitors INCB054329 (study INCB 54329-101; NCT02431260) and INCB057643 (study INCB 57643-101; NCT02711137). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (≥18 years) with advanced malignancies, ≥1 prior therapy, and adequate organ functions received oral INCB054329 (monotherapy) or INCB057643 (monotherapy or in combination with standard-of-care) in 21-day cycles (or 28-day cycles depending on standard-of-care combination). Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Sixty-nine and 134 patients received INCB054329 and INCB057643, respectively. Study INCB 54329-101 has been completed; INCB 57643-101 is currently active, but not recruiting (no patients were receiving treatment as of January 8, 2019). Terminal elimination half-life was shorter for INCB054329 versus INCB057643 (mean [SD], 2.24 [2.03] vs. 11.1 [8.27] hours). INCB054329 demonstrated higher interpatient variability in oral clearance versus INCB057643 (CV%, 142% vs. 45.5%). Most common (>20%) any-grade treatment-related adverse events were similar for both drugs (INCB054329; INCB057643): nausea (35%; 30%), thrombocytopenia (33%; 32%), fatigue (29%; 30%), decreased appetite (26%; 22%). Two confirmed complete responses and 4 confirmed partial responses with INCB057643 were reported as best responses. CONCLUSIONS: INCB057643 exhibited a more favorable PK profile versus INCB054329; exposure-dependent thrombocytopenia was observed with both drugs which limited the target inhibition that could be safely maintained. Further efforts are required to identify patient populations that can benefit most, and an optimal dosing scheme to maximize therapeutic index.

Genomic profiling of cell-free circulating tumor DNA in patients with colorectal cancer and its fidelity to the genomics of the tumor biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Liquid biopsy offers the ability to non-invasively analyze the genome of a tumor through circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to identify targetable and prognostic genomic alterations. Few studies have rigorously analyzed ctDNA results and determined the fidelity with which they recapitulate the genomics of a sequenced tissue sample obtained from the same tumor. The clinical utility study (CUS) for the FoundationACT™ ctDNA assay (Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA, USA; NCT02620527) is a multi-center prospective clinical study for multiple solid tumor types to compare genomic profiling of paired tissue and blood samples from the same patient. In this subset of the study, paired specimens from 96 patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) were analyzed with comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of the tumor tissue sample (FoundationOne®) and blood sample (FoundationACT™). METHODS: Both samples underwent CGP using the hybrid capture-based Illumina Hi-Seq technology. Maximum somatic allele frequency (MSAF) was used to estimate the fraction of ctDNA in the sample. The set of genes and targeted regions common to both tumor and liquid were compared for each subject. RESULTS: Among these patients, 61% were male; 74% had clinical stage IV disease, 19% had clinical stage III disease, and 7% had clinical stage II disease. Time between the tissue biopsy and liquid biopsy (range, 0-709 days) had a significant impact on the positive percent agreement (PPA) between the two assays. Eighty percent of cases had evidence of ctDNA in the blood (MSAF >0). For all cases with MSAF >0, 171 base substitutions and insertions/deletions (indels) were identified in the tumor, and 79% (PPA) of these identical alterations were also identified in matched ctDNA samples; PPA increased to 87% for cases <270 days between the tissue and liquid biopsy, 95% for <90 days, and 100% PPA for <30 days. All known and likely short variants in KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF were analyzed independently as testing of these genes is recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) for patients with CRC and have therapeutic implications. For NCCN genes, PPA was 80% for all time points for short variants; PPA increased to 90% for cases <270 days between the tissue and liquid biopsy. There was high concordance for KRAS G12X between tissue and liquid: overall percent agreement (97%), PPA (93%), negative percent agreement (NPA) (100%), positive predictive value (PPV) (100%), and negative predictive value (NPV) (96%) for the <270 day cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In cases where tumor tissue profiling is not possible, these results provide compelling evidence that genomic profiling of ctDNA in late stage CRC shows a high concordance with tumor tissue sequencing results and can be used to identify most clinically relevant alterations capable of guiding therapy for these patients.

Avelumab monotherapy as first-line or second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: phase Ib results from the JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial.

BACKGROUND: Antibodies targeting programmed death-1 (PD-1) or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) have shown clinical activity in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This phase Ib cohort of the JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial assessed the efficacy and safety of avelumab (anti-PD-L1) monotherapy in patients with mRCC as either first-line (1 L) or second-line (2 L) treatment. METHODS: Patients with mRCC with a clear-cell component who were treatment naive (1 L subgroup) or had disease progression after one prior line of therapy (2 L subgroup) received avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenous infusion every 2 weeks. Endpoints included confirmed best overall response, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), PD-L1 expression, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients were enrolled in the 1 L subgroup, and 20 patients were enrolled in the 2 L subgroup. In the 1 L and 2 L subgroups, confirmed objective response rates were 16.1 and 10.0%, median DOR was 9.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-not evaluable) and not evaluable (95% CI, 6.9-not evaluable), median PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI, 5.5-9.5) and 5.6 months (95% CI, 2.3-9.6), and median OS was not evaluable (95% CI, not evaluable) and 16.9 months (95% CI, 8.3-not evaluable), respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 51 patients in the 1 L subgroup (82.3%) and 14 patients in the 2 L subgroup (70.0%). Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs occurred in eight patients in the 1 L subgroup (12.9%) and one patient in the 2 L subgroup (5.0%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: Avelumab showed clinical activity and a manageable safety profile in both the 1 L and 2 L treatment setting in patients with mRCC. These data support the use of avelumab in combination with other agents in mRCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01772004 ; registered 21 January, 2013.

A Phase II, Multicenter, Single-Arm Study of Mipsagargin (G-202) as a Second-Line Therapy Following Sorafenib for Adult Patients with Progressive Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background: Mipsagargin (G-202) is a thapsigargin-based prodrug with cytotoxic activity masked by a peptide that is cleaved by prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), a protease expressed in prostate cancer cells and the endothelium of tumor vasculature. It was hypothesized that PSMA-mediated activation of mipsagargin would result in disruption of the tumor vasculature, leading to a decrease in blood flow, and in direct cytotoxic effects on tumor cells, resulting in anti-tumor activity. Method: In this open-label, Phase II study, mipsagargin was administered intravenously on Days 1, 2, and 3 of a 28-day cycle to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who progressed on or after treatment with sorafenib or intolerant of sorafenib. Assessments included time to disease progression (TTP), response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Blood flow metrics in hepatic lesions were evaluated using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI). Results: Of 25 treated patients, 19 were evaluable for efficacy. None had an objective response, 12 (63.2%) had a best response of stable disease, and 12 (63.2%) showed radiologic progression; seven patients (36.8%) were censored. The median TTP was 134.0 days, median PFS was 129.0 days, and median OS was 205.0 days. Of five patients with DCE-MRI data for 11 HCC lesions, all demonstrated a reduced Ktrans (mean, 52%). The most common treatment-emergent AEs were Grade 1-2 and consisted of increased blood creatinine (68.0%), fatigue (56.0%), and nausea (44.0%). Conclusions: Mipsagargin is relatively well tolerated and promotes prolonged disease stabilization in patients with advanced HCC that had progressed on prior treatment with sorafenib. A significant decrease in Ktrans upon treatment suggests mipsagargin reduces blood flow in hepatic lesions.

Tissue/Site-Agnostic Study of Ribociclib for Tumors With Cyclin D-CDK4/6 Pathway Genomic Alterations: A Phase II, Open-Label, Single-Arm Basket Study.

PURPOSE: As part of the Novartis Signature Program, this study evaluated the efficacy of ribociclib (selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 [CDK4/6] inhibitor) in patients with cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway-aberrant tumors. METHODS: This was a phase II, single-arm, signal-seeking study in patients with advanced malignancies that had progressed on or after standard treatment. Prior identification of tumor CDK4/6 mutation or amplification, CCND1/3 amplification, or CDKN2A mutation or loss was required. Clinical benefit (defined as the proportion of patients with response or stable disease at ≥ 16 weeks) was the primary end point. RESULTS: From 61 centers in the United States, 106 patients (median age, 62.5 years) were enrolled across multiple malignancies. The patient population was heavily pretreated (median number of prior therapies, three; range, 0 to 19). Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 1.9). In patients with solid tumors, the clinical benefit rate was 18.1% (n = 19 of 105) and the overall response rate was 2.9% (n = 3 of 105); three partial responses occurred in patients with adenocarcinoma (unknown primary), soft tissue sarcoma, and urothelial carcinoma. No tumor cohort met the prespecified criteria for success. The most common adverse events suspected to be related to treatment were neutropenia (30.2%; decreased neutrophils, 15.1%), fatigue (31.1%), and nausea (29.2%). Fatigue and nausea were typically mild. Only one incident of febrile neutropenia was experienced (grade 3). CONCLUSION: No new or unexpected safety signals were observed in this heavily pretreated patient population. Although responses were seen in tumors with CCND1-CDK4/6 amplifications, the primary end point was not met, suggesting additional evaluation of ribociclib, possibly as combination therapy, is needed.

Signature program: a platform of basket trials.

Investigating targeted therapies can be challenging due to diverse tumor mutations and slow patient accrual for clinical studies. The Signature Program is a series of 8 phase 2, agent-specific basket protocols using a rapid study start-up approach involving no predetermined study sites. Each protocol evaluated 1 agent (buparlisib, dovitinib, binimetinib, encorafenib, sonidegib, BGJ398, ceritinib, or ribociclib) in patients with solid or hematologic malignancies and an actionable mutation. The primary endpoint of each study was the clinical benefit rate (ie, complete or partial response, or stable disease) at 16 weeks. A total of 192 individual sites were opened in the United States, with a median start-up time of 3.6 weeks. The most common tumor types among the 595 treated patients were colorectal (9.2%), non-small cell lung adenocarcinoma (9.1%), and ovarian (8.4%). Frequent genetic alterations were in PIK3CA, RAS, p16, and PTEN. Overall, 30 partial or complete responses were observed with 6 compounds in 16 tumor types. The Signature Program presents a unique and successful approach for rapid signal finding across multiple tumors and allowed various agents to be evaluated in patients with rare alterations. Incorporating these program features in conventional studies could lead to improved trial efficiencies and patient outcomes.

Left Atrial Size and Heart Failure Hospitalization in Patients with Diastolic Dysfunction and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

CONTEXT: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a clinical syndrome associated with diastolic function abnormalities. It remains unclear which factors, if any, can predict the transition from asymptomatic diastolic dysfunction to an overt symptomatic phase. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients hospitalized with suspected heart failure between January 2012 and November 2014 with a transthoracic echocardiogram demonstrating preserved systolic function were screened (n = 425). Patients meeting the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association definition for HFpEF (n = 40) were matched in a 1:1 fashion to individuals admitted for hypertensive urgency with diastolic dysfunction and neither pulmonary edema nor history of heart failure (n = 40). The clinical records and echocardiograms of all eighty patients included in this retrospective study were reviewed. RESULTS: Patients with HFpEF had higher body mass index (BMI), creatinine, beta-blocker use, and Grade 2 diastolic dysfunction when compared to the hypertensive control population. Echocardiographic analysis demonstrated higher right ventricular systolic pressures, left ventricular mass index, E/A, and E/e' in patients with HFpEF. Similarly, differences were observed in most left atrial (LA) parameters including larger LA maximum and minimum volume indices, as well as smaller LA-emptying fractions in the heart failure group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed LA minimum volume index (odds ratio [OR]: 1.23 [1.09-1.38], P = 0.001) to have the strongest association with heart failure hospitalization after adjustment for creatinine (OR: 7.09 [1.43-35.07], P = 0.016) and BMI (OR: 1.11 [0.99-1.25], P = 0.074). CONCLUSION: LA minimum volume index best correlated with HFpEF in this patient cohort with diastolic dysfunction.

Electrocardiographic Criteria for the Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy.

BACKGROUND: Current electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria for the diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) have low sensitivity. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to test a new method to improve the diagnostic performance of the electrocardiogram. METHODS: The study was divided into 2 groups, a test and a validation cohort. In the test cohort, 94 patients were analyzed, including 47 with the diagnosis of hypertensive crisis and 47 with normal blood pressure at admission. Echocardiography was used to estimate the left ventricular mass index. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis was used for comparison of single and combined leads. The McNemar test was used to assess agreement among the ECG criteria against the left ventricular mass index. The proposed ECG criteria involved measuring the amplitude of the deepest S wave (SD) in any single lead and adding it to the S wave amplitude of lead V4 (SV4). Currently accepted LVH ECG criteria such as Cornell voltage and Sokolow-Lyon were used for comparison. The validation cohort consisted of 122 consecutive patients referred for an echocardiogram regardless of the admitting diagnosis. RESULTS: The SD was the most accurate single lead measurement for the diagnosis of LVH (AUC: 0.80; p < 0.001). When both cohorts were analyzed, the SD + SV4 criteria outperformed Cornell voltage with a significantly higher sensitivity (62% [95% confidence interval [CI]: 50% to 72%] vs. 35% [95% CI: 24% to 46%]). The specificities of all the criteria were ≥90%, with no significant difference among them. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed criteria for the ECG diagnosis of LVH improved the sensitivity and overall accuracy of the test.

Prevention of everolimus-related stomatitis in women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer using dexamethasone mouthwash (SWISH): a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Stomatitis is a class effect associated with the inhibition of mTOR and is associated with everolimus therapy for breast cancer. Topical steroids might reduce stomatitis incidence and severity, and the need for dose reductions and interruptions of everolimus. Anecdotal use of topical steroid oral prophylaxis has been reported in patients with breast cancer. We aimed to assess dexamethasone-based mouthwash for prevention of stomatitis in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: This US-based, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 prevention study enrolled women aged 18 years and older with postmenopausal status who had histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. Beginning on day 1 of cycle 1, patients received everolimus 10 mg plus exemestane 25 mg daily, with 10 mL of alcohol-free dexamethasone 0·5 mg per 5 mL oral solution (swish for 2 min and spit, four times daily for 8 weeks). After 8 weeks, dexamethasone mouthwash could be continued for up to eight additional weeks at the discretion of the clinician and patient. The primary endpoint was incidence of grade 2 or worse stomatitis by 8 weeks assessed in the full analysis set (patients who received at least one dose of everolimus and exemestane and at least one confirmed dose of dexamethasone mouthwash) versus historical controls from the BOLERO-2 trial (everolimus and exemestane treatment in patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who were not given dexamethasone mouthwash for prevention of stomatitis). This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02069093. FINDINGS: Between May 28, 2014, and Oct 8, 2015, we enrolled 92 women; 85 were evaluable for efficacy. By 8 weeks, the incidence of grade 2 or worse stomatitis was two (2%) of 85 patients (95% CI 0·29-8·24), versus 159 (33%) of 482 patients (95% CI 28·8-37·4) for the duration of the BOLERO-2 study. Overall, 83 (90%) of 92 patients had at least one adverse event. The most frequently reported grade 3 and 4 adverse events in the safety set were hyperglycaemia (seven [8%] of 92 patients), rash (four [4%]), and dyspnoea (three [3%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 20 (22%) patients; six (7%) were deemed treatment related, with dyspnoea (three [3%]) and pneumonia (two [2%]) reported most frequently. 12 (13%) of 92 patients had adverse events suspected to be related to treatment that led to discontinuation of everolimus and exemestane (the most common were rash, hyperglycaemia, and stomatitis, which each affected two [2%] patients). INTERPRETATION: Prophylactic use of dexamethasone oral solution substantially reduced the incidence and severity of stomatitis in patients receiving everolimus and exemestane and could be a new standard of oral care for patients receiving everolimus and exemestane therapy. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Simplified prediction of postoperative cardiac surgery outcomes with a novel score: R2CHADS2.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of R2CHADS2, CHADS2, and CHA2DS2-VASc scores vs the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score as predictors of morbidity and mortality after cardiovascular surgery. METHODS: All patients who underwent cardiothoracic surgery at our institution from January 2008 to July 2013 were analyzed. Only those patients who fulfilled the criteria for STS score calculation were included. The R2CHADS2 score was computed as follows: 2 points for GFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (R2), prior stroke or TIA (S2); 1 point for history of congestive heart failure (C), hypertension (H), age ≥75 years (A), or diabetes (D). Area under the curve (AUC) analysis was used to estimate the accuracy of the different scores. The end point variables included operative mortality, permanent stroke, and renal failure as defined by the STS database system. RESULTS: Of the 3,492 patients screened, 2,263 met the inclusion criteria. These included 1,160 (51%) isolated valve surgery, 859 (38%) coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and 245 (11%) combined procedures. There were 147 postoperative events: 75 (3%) patients had postoperative renal failure, 48 (2%) had operative mortality, and 24 (1%) had permanent stroke. AUC analysis revealed that STS, R2CHADS2, CHADS2, and CHA2DS2-VASc reliably estimated all postoperative outcomes. STS and R2CHADS2 scores had the best accuracy overall, with no significant difference in AUC values between them. CONCLUSION: The R2CHADS2 score estimates postoperative events with acceptable accuracy and if further validated may be used as a simple preoperative risk tool calculator.

Usefulness of the CHA2DS2VASc score to predict postoperative stroke in patients having cardiac surgery independent of atrial fibrillation.

Despite its association with cardioembolic stroke, atrial fibrillation (AF) appears to be inconsistent as a risk factor for postoperative strokes in patients who underwent cardiac surgery. Furthermore, the relation between AF and the CHA2DS2VASc score has not been definitively established with respect to postoperative stroke. We retrospectively analyzed the records of all cardiac surgery performed at our institution between January 2008 and July 2013. Baseline characteristics, operative data, and postoperative outcomes were compared in patients who developed stroke with those who did not. Previously recognized stroke risk factors, including AF, were analyzed along with the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2VASc scores. A total of 3,492 consecutive patients were identified, of which 2,077 (60%) underwent valve surgery, 915 (26%) had coronary artery bypass grafting, 399 (11%) underwent combined coronary artery bypass grafting and valve procedures, and 101 (3%) had other cardiac operations. Postoperative ischemic strokes occurred in 44 patients (1.2%). The development of a stroke was associated with older age (74 ± 12 vs 69 ± 12, p = 0.008), preoperative antiplatelet medication use (38.6% vs 24.5%, p = 0.043), congestive heart failure (37% vs 20%, p = 0.002), and greater CHADS2 (2.48 ± 1.3 vs 1.98 ± 1.1, p = 0.015) and CHA2DS2VASc scores (4.2 ± 1.8 vs 3.4 ± 1.6, p = 0.002). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that the CHA2DS2VASc score was the only independent predictor of postoperative strokes (odds ratio 1.25; 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.5, p = 0.014). In conclusion, the CHA2DS2VASc score appears to predict postoperative strokes independent of the presence of AF.