Biomarker Predictors of Clinical Efficacy of the Anti-IgE Biologic, Omalizumab, in Severe Asthma in Adults: Results of the SoMOSA Study.

BACKGROUND: The anti-IgE monoclonal, omalizumab, is widely used for severe asthma. This study aimed to identify biomarkers that predict clinical improvement during one year of omalizumab treatment. METHODS: 1-year, open-label, Study of Mechanisms of action of Omalizumab in Severe Asthma (SoMOSA) involving 216 severe (GINA step 4/5) uncontrolled atopic asthmatics (≥2 severe exacerbations in previous year) on high-dose inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting ß-agonists, ± mOCS. It had two phases: 0-16 weeks, to assess early clinical improvement by Global Evaluation of Therapeutic Effectiveness (GETE), and 16-52 weeks, to assess late responses by ≥50% reduction in exacerbations or dose of maintenance oral corticosteroids (mOCS). All participants provided samples (exhaled breath, blood, sputum, urine) before and after 16 weeks of omalizumab treatment. RESULTS: 191 patients completed phase 1; 63% had early improvement. Of 173 who completed phase 2, 69% had reduced exacerbations by ≥50%, while 57% (37/65) on mOCS reduced their dose by ≥50%. The primary outcome 2, 3-dinor-11-ß-PGF2α, GETE and standard clinical biomarkers (blood and sputum eosinophils, exhaled nitric oxide, serum IgE) did not predict either clinical response. Five breathomics (GC-MS) and 5 plasma lipid biomarkers strongly predicted the ≥50% reduction in exacerbations (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC): 0.780 and 0.922, respectively) and early responses (AUC:0.835 and 0.949, respectively). In independent cohorts, the GC-MS biomarkers differentiated between severe and mild asthma. Conclusions This is the first discovery of omics biomarkers that predict improvement to a biologic for asthma. Their prospective validation and development for clinical use is justified. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Ibrutinib as first-line therapy for mantle cell lymphoma: a multicenter, real-world UK study.

ABSTRACT: During the COVID-19 pandemic, ibrutinib with or without rituximab was approved in England for initial treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) instead of immunochemotherapy. Because limited data are available in this setting, we conducted an observational cohort study evaluating safety and efficacy. Adults receiving ibrutinib with or without rituximab for untreated MCL were evaluated for treatment toxicity, response, and survival, including outcomes in high-risk MCL (TP53 mutation/deletion/p53 overexpression, blastoid/pleomorphic, or Ki67 ≥ 30%). A total of 149 patients from 43 participating centers were enrolled: 74.1% male, median age 75 years, 75.2% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status of 0 to 1, 36.2% high-risk, and 8.9% autologous transplant candidates. All patients received ≥1 cycle ibrutinib (median, 8 cycles), 39.0% with rituximab. Grade ≥3 toxicity occurred in 20.3%, and 33.8% required dose reductions/delays. At 15.6-month median follow-up, 41.6% discontinued ibrutinib, 8.1% due to toxicity. Of 104 response-assessed patients, overall (ORR) and complete response (CR) rates were 71.2% and 20.2%, respectively. ORR was 77.3% (low risk) vs 59.0% (high risk) (P = .05) and 78.7% (ibrutinib-rituximab) vs 64.9% (ibrutinib; P = .13). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 26.0 months (all patients); 13.7 months (high risk) vs not reached (NR) (low risk; hazard ratio [HR], 2.19; P = .004). Median overall survival was NR (all); 14.8 months (high risk) vs NR (low risk; HR, 2.36; P = .005). Median post-ibrutinib survival was 1.4 months, longer in 41.9% patients receiving subsequent treatment (median, 8.6 vs 0.6 months; HR, 0.36; P = .002). Ibrutinib with or without rituximab was effective and well tolerated as first-line treatment of MCL, including older and transplant-ineligible patients. PFS and OS were significantly inferior in one-third of patients with high-risk disease and those unsuitable for post-ibrutinib treatment, highlighting the need for novel approaches in these groups.

Differential Efficacy From the Addition of Bortezomib to R-CHOP in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma According to the Molecular Subgroup in the REMoDL-B Study With a 5-Year Follow-Up.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.The REMoDL-B phase III adaptive trial compared rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (R-CHOP) versus R-CHOP + bortezomib (RB-CHOP) in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), stratified by molecular subtype. Primary analysis at a median follow-up of 30 months found no effect of bortezomib on progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS). Retrospective analysis using a gene expression-based classifier identified a molecular high-grade (MHG) group with worse outcomes. We present an updated analysis for patients successfully classified by the gene expression profile (GEP). Eligible patients were age older than 18 years with untreated DLBCL, fit enough for full-dose chemotherapy, and with adequate biopsies for GEP. Of 1,077 patients registered, 801 were identified with Activated B-Cell (ABC), Germinal Center B-cell, or MHG lymphoma. At a median follow-up of 64 months, there was no overall benefit of bortezomib on PFS or OS (5-year PFS hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; P = .085; OS HR, 0.86; P = .32). However, improved PFS and OS were seen in ABC lymphomas after RB-CHOP: 5-year OS 67% with R-CHOP versus 80% with RB-CHOP (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.95; P = .032). Five-year PFS was higher in MHG lymphomas: 29% versus 55% (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.84). Patients with ABC and MHG DLBCL may benefit from the addition of bortezomib to R-CHOP in initial therapy.

Spironolactone for adult female acne (SAFA): protocol for a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III randomised study of spironolactone as systemic therapy for acne in adult women.

INTRODUCTION: Acne is one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases worldwide and can have significant psychosocial impact and cause permanent scarring. Spironolactone, a potassium-sparing diuretic, has antiandrogenic properties, potentially reducing sebum production and hyperkeratinisation in acne-prone follicles. Dermatologists have prescribed spironolactone for acne in women for over 30 years, but robust clinical study data are lacking. This study seeks to evaluate whether spironolactone is clinically effective and cost-effective in treating acne in women. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Women (≥18 years) with persistent facial acne requiring systemic therapy are randomised to receive one tablet per day of 50 mg spironolactone or a matched placebo until week 6, increasing to up to two tablets per day (total of 100 mg spironolactone or matched placebo) until week 24, along with usual topical therapy if desired. Study treatment stops at week 24; participants are informed of their treatment allocation and enter an unblinded observational follow-up period for up to 6 months (up to week 52 after baseline). Primary outcome is the Acne-specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) symptom subscale score at week 12. Secondary outcomes include Acne-QoL total and subscales; participant acne self-assessment recorded on a 6-point Likert scale at 6, 12, 24 weeks and up to 52 weeks; Investigator's Global Assessment at weeks 6 and 12; cost and cost effectiveness are assessed over 24 weeks. Aiming to detect a group difference of 2 points on the Acne-QoL symptom subscale (SD 5.8, effect size 0.35), allowing for 20% loss to follow-up, gives a sample size of 398 participants. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol was approved by Wales Research Ethics Committee (18/WA/0420). Follow-up to be completed in early 2022. Findings will be disseminated to participants, peer-reviewed journals, networks and patient groups, on social media, on the study website and the Southampton Clinical Trials Unit website to maximise impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12892056;Pre-results.

AGILE-ACCORD: A Randomized, Multicentre, Seamless, Adaptive Phase I/II Platform Study to Determine the Optimal Dose, Safety and Efficacy of Multiple Candidate Agents for the Treatment of COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised platform trial.

OBJECTIVES: Phase I - To determine the optimal dose of each candidate (or combination of candidates) entered into the platform. Phase II - To determine the efficacy and safety of each candidate entered into the platform, compared to the current Standard of Care (SoC), and recommend whether it should be evaluated further in a later phase II & III platforms. TRIAL DESIGN: AGILE-ACCORD is a Bayesian multicentre, multi-arm, multi-dose, multi-stage open-label, adaptive, seamless phase I/II randomised platform trial to determine the optimal dose, activity and safety of multiple candidate agents for the treatment of COVID-19. Designed as a master protocol with each candidate being evaluated within its own sub-protocol (Candidate Specific Trial (CST) protocol), randomising between candidate and SoC with 2:1 allocation in favour of the candidate (N.B the first candidate has gone through regulatory approval and is expected to open to recruitment early summer 2020). Each dose will be assessed for safety sequentially in cohorts of 6 patients. Once a phase II dose has been identified we will assess efficacy by seamlessly expanding into a larger cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Patient populations can vary between CSTs, but the main eligibility criteria include adult patients (≥18 years) who have laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We will include both severe and mild-moderate patients defined as follows: Group A (severe disease) - patients with WHO Working Group on the Clinical Characteristics of COVID-19 infection 9-point ordinal scale of Grades 4 (hospitalised, oxygen by mask or nasal prongs), 5 (hospitalised, non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen), 6 (hospitalised, intubation and mechanical ventilation) or 7 (hospitalised, ventilation and additional organ support); Group B (mild-moderate disease) - ambulant or hospitalised patients with peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) >94% RA. If any CSTs are included in the community setting, the CST protocol will clarify whether patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection are also eligible. Participants will be recruited from England, North Ireland, Wales and Scotland. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Comparator is the current standard of care (SoC), in some CSTs plus placebo. Candidates that prevent uncontrolled cytokine release, prevention of viral replication, and other anti-viral treatment strategies are at various stages of development for inclusion into AGILE-ACCORD. Other CSTs will be added over time. There is not a set limit on the number of CSTs we can include within the AGILE-ACCORD Master protocol and we will upload each CST into this publication as each opens to recruitment. MAIN OUTCOMES: Phase I: Dose limiting toxicities using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5 Grade ≥3 adverse events. Phase II: Agreed on a CST basis depending on mechanism of action of the candidate and patient population. But may include; time to clinical improvement of at least 2 points on the WHO 9-point category ordinal scale [measured up to 29 days from randomisation], progression of disease (oxygen saturation (SaO2) <92%) or hospitalization or death, or change in time-weighted viral load [measured up to 29 days from randomisation]. RANDOMISATION: Varies with CST, but default is 2:1 allocation in favour of the candidate to maximise early safety data. BLINDING (MASKING): For the safety phase open-label although for some CSTs may include placebo or SoC for the efficacy phase. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Varies between CSTs. However simulations have shown that around 16 participants are necessary to determine futility or promise of a candidate at a given dose (in efficacy evaluation alone) and between 32 and 40 participants are required across the dose-finding and efficacy evaluation when capping the maximum number of participants contributing to the evaluation of a treatment at 40. TRIAL STATUS: Master protocol version number v5 07 May 2020, trial is in setup with full regulatory approval and utilises several digital technology solutions, including Medidata's Rave EDC [electronic data capture], RTSM for randomisation and patient eConsent on iPads via Rave Patient Cloud. The recruitment dates will vary between CSTs but at the time of writing no CSTs are yet open for recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2020-001860-27 14th March 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Systemic chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (New EPOC): long-term results of a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The interim analysis of the multicentre New EPOC trial in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis showed a significant reduction in progression-free survival in patients allocated to cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with those given chemotherapy alone. The focus of the present analysis was to assess the effect on overall survival. METHODS: New EPOC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with KRAS wild-type (codons 12, 13, and 61) resectable or suboptimally resectable colorectal liver metastases and a WHO performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chemotherapy with or without cetuximab before and after liver resection. Randomisation was done centrally with minimisation factors of surgical centre, poor prognosis cancer, and previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin. Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 2 h, l-folinic acid (175 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h) or d,l-folinic acid (350 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h), and fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 5 min, followed by a 46 h infusion of fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 repeated every 2 weeks (regimen one), or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 2 h and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 repeated every 3 weeks (regimen two). Patients who had received adjuvant oxaliplatin could receive irinotecan 180 mg/m2 intravenously over 30 min with fluorouracil instead of oxaliplatin (regimen three). Cetuximab was given intravenously, 500 mg/m2 every 2 weeks with regimen one and three or a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 followed by a weekly infusion of 250 mg/m2 with regimen two. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival was published previously. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, preoperative response, pathological resection status, and safety. Trial recruitment was halted prematurely on the advice of the Trial Steering Committee on Nov 1, 2012. All analyses (except safety) were done on the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 22944367. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2007, and Oct 12, 2012, 257 eligible patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with cetuximab (n=129) or without cetuximab (n=128). This analysis was carried out 5 years after the last patient was recruited, as defined in the protocol, at a median follow-up of 66·7 months (IQR 58·0-77·5). Median progression-free survival was 22·2 months (95% CI 18·3-26·8) in the chemotherapy alone group and 15·5 months (13·8-19·0) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·17, 95% CI 0·87-1·56; p=0·304). Median overall survival was 81·0 months (59·6 to not reached) in the chemotherapy alone group and 55·4 months (43·5-71·5) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (HR 1·45, 1·02-2·05; p=0·036). There was no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of preoperative response or pathological resection status between groups. Five deaths might have been treatment-related (one in the chemotherapy alone group and four in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events reported were: neutrophil count decreased (26 [19%] of 134 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 21 [15%] of 137 in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group), diarrhoea (13 [10%] vs 14 [10%]), skin rash (one [1%] vs 22 [16%]), thromboembolic events (ten [7%] vs 11 [8%]), lethargy (ten [7%] vs nine [7%]), oral mucositis (three [2%] vs 14 [10%]), vomiting (seven [5%] vs seven [5%]), peripheral neuropathy (eight [6%] vs five [4%]), and pain (six [4%] vs six [4%]). INTERPRETATION: Although the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves the overall survival in some studies in patients with advanced, inoperable metastatic disease, its use in the perioperative setting in patients with operable disease confers a significant disadvantage in terms of overall survival. Cetuximab should not be used in this setting. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Gene-expression profiling of bortezomib added to standard chemoimmunotherapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (REMoDL-B): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Biologically distinct subtypes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma can be identified using gene-expression analysis to determine their cell of origin, corresponding to germinal centre or activated B cell. We aimed to investigate whether adding bortezomib to standard therapy could improve outcomes in patients with these subtypes. METHODS: In a randomised evaluation of molecular guided therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with bortezomib (REMoDL-B), an open-label, adaptive, randomised controlled, phase 3 superiority trial, participants were recruited from 107 cancer centres in the UK (n=94) and Switzerland (n=13). Eligible patients had previously untreated, histologically confirmed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with sufficient diagnostic material from initial biopsies for gene-expression profiling and pathology review; were aged 18 years or older; had ECOG performance status of 2 or less; had bulky stage I or stage II-IV disease requiring full-course chemotherapy; had measurable disease; and had cardiac, lung, renal, and liver function sufficient to tolerate chemotherapy. Patients initially received one 21-day cycle of standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (R-CHOP; rituximab 375 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, and vincristine 1·4 mg/m2 [to a maximum of 2 mg total dose] intravenously on day 1 of the cycle, and prednisolone 100 mg orally once daily on days 1-5). During this time, we did gene-expression profiling using whole genome cDNA-mediated annealing, selection, extension, and ligation assay of tissue from routine diagnostic biopsy samples to determine the cell-of-origin subtype of each participant (germinal centre B cell, activated B cell, or unclassified). Patients were then centrally randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, with block randomisation stratified by international prognostic index score and cell-of-origin subtype, to continue R-CHOP alone (R-CHOP group; control), or with bortezomib (RB-CHOP group; experimental; 1·3 mg/m2 intravenously or 1·6 mg/m2 subcutaneously) on days 1 and 8 for cycles two to six. If RNA extracted from the diagnostic tissues was of insufficient quality or quantity, participants were given R-CHOP as per the control group. The primary endpoint was 30-month progression-free survival, for the germinal centre and activated B-cell population. The primary analysis was on the modified intention-to-treat population of activated and germinal centre B-cell population. Safety was assessed in all participants who were given at least one dose of study drug. We report the progression-free survival and safety outcomes for patients in the follow-up phase after the required number of events occurred. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01324596, and recruitment and treatment has completed for all participants, with long-term follow-up ongoing. FINDINGS: Between June 2, 2011, and June 10, 2015, 1128 eligible patients were registered, of whom 918 (81%) were randomly assigned to receive treatment (n=459 to R-CHOP, n=459 to RB-CHOP), comprising 244 (26·6%) with activated B-cell disease, 475 (51·7%) with germinal centre B cell disease, and 199 (21·7%) with unclassified disease. At a median follow-up of 29·7 months (95% CI 29·0-32·0), we saw no evidence for a difference in progression-free survival in the combined germinal centre and activated B-cell population between R-CHOP and RB-CHOP (30-month progression-free survival 70·1%, 95% CI 65·0-74·7 vs 74·3%, 69·3-78·7; hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·65-1·13; p=0·28). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event was haematological toxicity, reported in 178 (39·8%) of 447 patients given R-CHOP and 187 (42·1%) of 444 given RB-CHOP. However, RB-CHOP was not associated with increased haematological toxicity and 398 [87·1%] of 459 participants assigned to receive RB-CHOP completed six cycles of treatment. Grade 3 or worse neuropathy occurred in 17 (3·8%) patients given RB-CHOP versus eight (1·8%) given R-CHOP. Serious adverse events occurred in 190 (42·5%) patients given R-CHOP, including five treatment-related deaths, and 223 (50·2%) given RB-CHOP, including four treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: This is the first large-scale study in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma to use real-time molecular characterisation for prospective stratification, randomisation, and subsequent analysis of biologically distinct subgroups of patients. The addition of bortezomib did not improve progression-free survival. FUNDING: Janssen-Cilag, Bloodwise, and Cancer Research UK.

RIVA - a phase IIa study of rituximab and varlilumab in relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Over 12,000 new cases of B-cell malignancies are diagnosed in the UK each year, with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) being the most common subtypes. Standard frontline therapy consists of immunochemotherapy with a CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAb), such as rituximab, delivered in combination with multi-agent chemotherapy. Despite being considered a treatable and potentially curable cancer, approximately 30% of DLBCL cases will relapse after frontline therapy. Advanced stage FL is incurable and typically has a relapsing and remitting course with a frequent need for re-treatment. Based on supportive preclinical data, we hypothesised that the addition of varlilumab (an anti-CD27 mAb) to rituximab (an anti-CD20 mAb) can improve the rate, depth and duration of the response of rituximab monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. METHODS/DESIGN: Combination treatment of varlilumab plus rituximab, in two different dosing regimens, is being tested in the RIVA trial. RIVA is a two-stage open-label randomised phase IIa design in up to 40 patients with low- or high-grade relapsed or refractory CD20+ B-cell lymphoma. The study is open to recruitment in the UK. Enrolled patients are randomised 1:1 to two different experimental varlilumab to rituximab combinations. The primary objective is to determine the safety and tolerability of the combination and the anti-tumour activity (response) in relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. Secondary objectives will include an evaluation of the duration of the response and overall survival. Tertiary translational objectives include assessment of B-cell depletion, changes in immune effector cell populations, expression of CD27 as a biomarker of response and pharmacokinetic properties. Analyses will not be powered for formal statistical comparisons between treatment arms. DISCUSSION: RIVA will determine whether the combination of rituximab and varlilumab in relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies is active and safe prior to future phase II/III trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT, 2017-000302-37. Registered on 16 January 2017. ISRCTN, ISRCTN15025004 . Registered on 16 August 2017.

Germline BRCA mutation and outcome in young-onset breast cancer (POSH): a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies provide conflicting interpretations of the effect of inherited genetic factors on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer. The primary aim of this study was to determine the effect of a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation on breast cancer outcomes in patients with young-onset breast cancer. METHODS: We did a prospective cohort study of female patients recruited from 127 hospitals in the UK aged 40 years or younger at first diagnosis (by histological confirmation) of invasive breast cancer. Patients with a previous invasive malignancy (except non-melanomatous skin cancer) were excluded. Patients were identified within 12 months of initial diagnosis. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were identified using blood DNA collected at recruitment. Clinicopathological data, and data regarding treatment and long-term outcomes, including date and site of disease recurrence, were collected from routine medical records at 6 months, 12 months, and then annually until death or loss to follow-up. The primary outcome was overall survival for all BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers (BRCA-positive) versus all non-carriers (BRCA-negative) at 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years after diagnosis. A prespecified subgroup analysis of overall survival was done in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Recruitment was completed in 2008, and long-term follow-up is continuing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24, 2000, and Jan 24, 2008, we recruited 2733 women. Genotyping detected a pathogenic BRCA mutation in 338 (12%) patients (201 with BRCA1, 137 with BRCA2). After a median follow-up of 8·2 years (IQR 6·0-9·9), 651 (96%) of 678 deaths were due to breast cancer. There was no significant difference in overall survival between BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative patients in multivariable analyses at any timepoint (at 2 years: 97·0% [95% CI 94·5-98·4] vs 96·6% [95·8-97·3]; at 5 years: 83·8% [79·3-87·5] vs 85·0% [83·5-86·4]; at 10 years: 73·4% [67·4-78·5] vs 70·1% [67·7-72·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·76-1·22]; p=0·76). Of 558 patients with triple-negative breast cancer, BRCA mutation carriers had better overall survival than non-carriers at 2 years (95% [95% CI 89-97] vs 91% [88-94]; HR 0·59 [95% CI 0·35-0·99]; p=0·047) but not 5 years (81% [73-87] vs 74% [70-78]; HR 1·13 [0·70-1·84]; p=0·62) or 10 years (72% [62-80] vs 69% [63-74]; HR 2·12 [0·82-5·49]; p= 0·12). INTERPRETATION: Patients with young-onset breast cancer who carry a BRCA mutation have similar survival as non-carriers. However, BRCA mutation carriers with triple-negative breast cancer might have a survival advantage during the first few years after diagnosis compared with non-carriers. Decisions about timing of additional surgery aimed at reducing future second primary-cancer risks should take into account patient prognosis associated with the first malignancy and patient preferences. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, the UK National Cancer Research Network, the Wessex Cancer Trust, Breast Cancer Now, and the PPP Healthcare Medical Trust Grant.

A comparison of the clinical effectiveness and cost of specialised individually delivered parent training for preschool attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and a generic, group-based programme: a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of the New Forest Parenting Programme versus Incredible Years.

The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and cost of specialised individually delivered parent training (PT) for preschool children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) against generic group-based PT and treatment as usual (TAU). This is a multi-centre three-arm, parallel group randomised controlled trial conducted in National Health Service Trusts. The participants included in this study were preschool children (33-54 months) fulfilling ADHD research diagnostic criteria. New Forest Parenting Programme (NFPP)-12-week individual, home-delivered ADHD PT programme; Incredible Years (IY)-12-week group-based, PT programme initially designed for children with behaviour problems were the interventions. Primary outcome-Parent ratings of child's ADHD symptoms (Swanson, Nolan & Pelham Questionnaire-SNAP-IV). Secondary outcomes-teacher ratings (SNAP-IV) and direct observations of ADHD symptoms and parent/teacher ratings of conduct problems. NFPP, IY and TAU outcomes were measured at baseline (T1) and post treatment (T2). NFPP and IY outcomes only were measured 6 months post treatment (T3). Researchers, but not therapists or parents, were blind to treatment allocation. Analysis employed mixed effect regression models (multiple imputations). Intervention and other costs were estimated using standardized approaches. NFPP and IY did not differ on parent-rated SNAP-IV, ADHD combined symptoms [mean difference - 0.009 95% CI (- 0.191, 0.173), p = 0.921] or any other measure. Small, non-significant, benefits of NFPP over TAU were seen for parent-rated SNAP-IV, ADHD combined symptoms [- 0.189 95% CI (- 0.380, 0.003), p = 0.053]. NFPP significantly reduced parent-rated conduct problems compared to TAU across scales (p values < 0.05). No significant benefits of IY over TAU were seen for parent-rated SNAP, ADHD symptoms [- 0.16 95% CI (- 0.37, 0.04), p = 0.121] or parent-rated conduct problems (p > 0.05). The cost per family of providing NFPP in the trial was significantly lower than IY (£1591 versus £2103). Although, there were no differences between NFPP and IY with regards clinical effectiveness, individually delivered NFPP cost less. However, this difference may be reduced when implemented in routine clinical practice. Clinical decisions should take into account parental preferences between delivery approaches.

COAST (Cisplatin ototoxicity attenuated by aspirin trial): A phase II double-blind, randomised controlled trial to establish if aspirin reduces cisplatin induced hearing-loss.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin is one of the most ototoxic chemotherapy drugs, resulting in a permanent and irreversible hearing loss in up to 50% of patients. Cisplatin and gentamicin are thought to damage hearing through a common mechanism, involving reactive oxygen species in the inner ear. Aspirin has been shown to minimise gentamicin-induced ototoxicity. We, therefore, tested the hypothesis that aspirin could also reduce ototoxicity from cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: A total of 94 patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy for multiple cancer types were recruited into a phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and randomised in a ratio of 1:1 to receive aspirin 975 mg tid and omeprazole 20 mg od, or matched placebos from the day before, to 2 days after, their cisplatin dose(s), for each treatment cycle. Patients underwent pure tone audiometry before and at 7 and 90 days after their final cisplatin dose. The primary end-point was combined hearing loss (cHL), the summed hearing loss at 6 kHz and 8 kHz, in both ears. RESULTS: Although aspirin was well tolerated, it did not protect hearing in patients receiving cisplatin (p-value = 0.233, 20% one-sided level of significance). In the aspirin arm, patients demonstrated mean cHL of 49 dB (standard deviation [SD] 61.41) following cisplatin compared with placebo patients who demonstrated mean cHL of 36 dB (SD 50.85). Women had greater average hearing loss than men, and patients treated for head and neck malignancy experienced the greatest cHL. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin did not protect from cisplatin-related ototoxicity. Cisplatin and gentamicin may therefore have distinct ototoxic mechanisms, or cisplatin-induced ototoxicity may be refractory to the aspirin regimen used here.

Timing of surgical intervention for developmental dysplasia of the hip: a randomised controlled trial (Hip 'Op).

BACKGROUND: Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is a very common congenital disorder, and late-presenting cases often require surgical treatment. Surgical reduction of the hip may be complicated by avascular necrosis (AVN), which occurs as a result of interruption to the femoral head blood supply during treatment and can result in long-term problems. Some surgeons delay surgical treatment until the ossific nucleus (ON) has developed, whereas others believe that the earlier the reduction is performed, the better the result. Currently there is no definitive evidence to support either strategy. OBJECTIVES: To determine, in children aged 12 weeks to 13 months, whether or not delayed surgical treatment of a congenitally dislocated hip reduces the incidence of AVN at 5 years of age. The main clinical outcome measures were incidence of AVN and the need for a secondary surgical procedure during 5 years' follow-up. In addition, to perform (1) a qualitative evaluation of the adopted strategy and (2) a health economic analysis based on NHS and societal costs. DESIGN: Phase III, unmasked, randomised controlled trial with qualitative and health economics analyses. Participants were randomised 1 : 1 to undergo either early or delayed surgery. SETTING: Paediatric orthopaedic surgical centres in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 12 weeks to 13 months with DDH, either newly diagnosed or following failed splintage, and who required surgery. We had a target recruitment of 636 children. INTERVENTIONS: Surgical reduction of the hip performed as per the timing allocated at randomisation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome - incidence of AVN at 5 years of age (according to the Kalamchi and MacEwen classification). Secondary outcomes - need for secondary surgery, presence or absence of the ON at the time of primary treatment, quality of life for the main carer and child, and a health economics and qualitative analysis. RESULTS: The trial closed early after reaching < 5% of the recruitment target. Fourteen patients were randomised to early treatment and 15 to delayed treatment. Implementation of rescue strategies did not improve recruitment. No primary outcome data were collected, and no meaningful conclusions could be made from the small number of non-qualitative secondary outcome data. The qualitative work generated rich data around three key themes: (1) access to, and experiences of, primary and secondary care; (2) the impact of surgery on family life; and (3) participants' experiences of being in the trial. LIMITATIONS: Overoptimistic estimates of numbers of eligible patients seen at recruiting centres during the planning of the trial, as well as an overestimation of the recruitment rate, may have also contributed to unrealistic expectations on achievable patient numbers. FUTURE WORK: There may be scope for investigation using routinely available data. CONCLUSIONS: Hip 'Op has highlighted the importance of accurate advance information on numbers of available eligible patients, as well as support from all participating investigators when conducting surgical research. Despite substantial consultation with parents of children in the planning stage, the level of non-participation experienced during recruitment was much higher than anticipated. The qualitative work has emphasised the need for appropriate advice and robust support for parents regarding the 'real-life' aspects of managing children with DDH. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN76958754. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Uva-ursi extract and ibuprofen as alternative treatments of adult female urinary tract infection (ATAFUTI): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Women with acute uncomplicated urine infection are usually treated with antibiotics. One trial has demonstrated that delayed antibiotic treatment offered without symptom relief results in a modest reduction in antibiotic use. There is some evidence that ibuprofen provides symptom relief and reduces antibiotic use. Uva-ursi, a herbal product, has a traditional use for urinary infection symptom relief. We set out to test: in adult women with suspected UTI who accept the delayed prescription strategy: Do NSAIDs or uva-ursi (a herbal product) provide relief from urinary symptoms and reduce antibiotic use. METHODS/DESIGN: Adult women with suspected urinary tract infection presenting to primary care will be randomised using a factorial trial design in which patients will be randomised to one of two interventions as below: Group 1 - Uva-ursi + advice to take ibuprofen Group 2 - Placebo + advice to take ibuprofen Group 3 - Uva-ursi + no advice to take ibuprofen Group 4 - Placebo + no advice to take ibuprofen Patients and physicians will be blinded to the randomised group for the herb. The main outcome is symptom severity at days 2-4 recorded in a validated, self-report diary used in previous studies. Secondary outcomes include antibiotic use and symptom duration. In total the trial will require 328 patients in order to achieve at least 90% power for the primary endpoint and 80% for the secondary endpoint. In accordance with CONSORT guidelines all comparative analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis using SPSS or similar package. DISCUSSION: The outcomes from this trial have the potential to modify the current approach to the management of acute urinary symptoms with less dependence on the use of antibiotics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN43397016 . Registered on 11 February 2015.

Patterns of progression, treatment of progressive disease and post-progression survival in the New EPOC study.

BACKGROUND: The addition of cetuximab (CTX) to perioperative chemotherapy (CT) for operable colorectal liver metastases resulted in a shorter progression-free survival. Details of disease progression are described to further inform the primary study outcome. METHODS: A total of 257 KRAS wild-type patients were randomised to CT alone or CT with CTX. Data regarding sites and treatment of progressive disease were obtained for the 109 (CT n=48, CT and CTX n=61) patients with progressive disease at the cut-off date for analysis of November 2012. RESULTS: The liver was the most frequent site of progression (CT 67% (32/48); CT and CTX 66% (40/61)). A higher proportion of patients in the CT and group had multiple sites of progressive disease (CT 8%, 4/48; CT and CTX 23%, 14/61 P=0.04). Further treatment for progressive disease is known for 84 patients of whom 69 received further CT, most frequently irinotecan based. Twenty-two patients, 11 in each arm, received CTX as a further line agent. CONCLUSIONS: Both the distribution of progressive disease and further treatment are as expected for such a cohort. The pattern of disease progression seen is consistent with failure of systemic micrometastatic disease control rather than failure of local disease control following liver surgery.

Outcome and Biomarker Analysis from a Multicenter Phase 2 Study of Ipilimumab in Combination with Carboplatin and Etoposide as First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage SCLC.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ipilimumab combined with standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with extensive-stage SCLC. METHODS: Patients with chemotherapy-naive extensive-stage SCLC were treated with carboplatin and etoposide for up to six cycles. Ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, was given on day 1 of cycles 3 to 6 and every 12 weeks. Response was assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.0, and immune-related response criteria. The primary end point was 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST. Secondary end points included PFS according to immune-related PFS and overall survival. Autoantibody serum levels were evaluated and correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients were enrolled between September 2011 and April 2014; 39 were evaluable for safety and 38 for efficacy. Six of 38 patients (15.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 7.4-30.4]) were alive and progression-free at 1-year by RECIST. Median PFS was 6.9 months (95% CI: 5.5-7.9). Median immune-related PFS was 7.3 months (95% CI: 5.5-8.8). Median overall survival was 17.0 months (95% CI: 7.9-24.3). Of the patients evaluable for response, 21 of 29 (72.4%) achieved an objective response by RECIST and 28 of 33 (84.8%) achieved an objective response by the immune-related response criteria. All patients experienced at least one adverse event; at least one grade 3 or higher toxicity developed in 35 of 39 patients (89.7%); in 27 patients (69.2%) this was related to ipilimumab. Five deaths were reported to be related to ipilimumab. Positivity of an autoimmune profile at baseline was associated with improved outcomes and severe neurological toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab in combination with carboplatin and etoposide might benefit a subgroup of patients with advanced SCLC. Autoantibody analysis correlates with treatment benefit and toxicity and warrants further investigation.

Short duration immunochemotherapy followed by radioimmunotherapy consolidation is effective and well tolerated in relapsed follicular lymphoma: 5-year results from a UK National Cancer Research Institute Lymphoma Group study.

UNLABELLED: We report a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of abbreviated immunochemotherapy followed by (90) Y Ibritumomab tiuxetan ((90) Y-IT) in patients with recurrent follicular lymphoma. Of the 52 patients enrolled, 50 were treated with three cycles of R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone) or R-CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisolone), followed by (90) Y-IT regimen (15 MBq/kg, maximum 1200 MBq) preceded by two infusions of 250 mg/m(2) rituximab. The overall response rate was 98% with complete response (CR) 30% and partial response (PR) 68%. 18 patients with a PR following chemotherapy improved to a CR following (90) Y-IT: a conversion rate of 40%. Seven patients with PR following (90) Y-IT subsequently improved to a CR 12-18 months later, leading to an overall CR rate of 44%. With a median follow-up of 5 years, median progression-free survival was 23·1 months and overall survival was 77·5% at 5 years. High trough serum rituximab levels (median 112 µg/ml; range 52-241) were attained after four doses of rituximab, prior to (90) Y-IT; this was not found to influence response rates. The treatment was well tolerated with few (13·5%) grade 3 or 4 infective episodes and manageable haematological toxicity. Abbreviated immunochemotherapy followed by (90) Y-IT is an effective and well-tolerated treatment in recurrent follicular lymphoma patients previously exposed to rituximab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00637832.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of STeroids Or Pentoxifylline for Alcoholic Hepatitis (STOPAH): a 2 × 2 factorial randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Alcoholic hepatitis (AH) is a distinct presentation of alcoholic liver disease arising in patients who have been drinking to excess for prolonged periods, which is characterised by jaundice and liver failure. Severe disease is associated with high short-term mortality. Prednisolone and pentoxifylline (PTX) are recommended in guidelines for treatment of severe AH, but trials supporting their use have given heterogeneous results and controversy persists about their benefit. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of STeroids Or Pentoxifylline for Alcoholic Hepatitis trial was to resolve the clinical dilemma on the use of prednisolone or PTX. DESIGN: The trial was a randomised, double-blind, 2 × 2 factorial, multicentre design. SETTING: Sixty-five gastroenterology and hepatology inpatient units across the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with a clinical diagnosis of AH who had a Maddrey's discriminant function value of ≥ 32 were randomised into four arms: A, placebo/placebo; B, placebo/prednisolone; C, PTX/placebo; and D, PTX/prednisolone. Of the 5234 patients screened for the trial, 1103 were randomised and after withdrawals, 1053 were available for primary end-point analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Those allocated to prednisolone were given 40 mg daily for 28 days and those allocated to PTX were given 400 mg three times per day for 28 days. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measure was mortality at 28 days. Secondary outcome measures included mortality or liver transplant at 90 days and at 1 year. Rates of recidivism among survivors and the impact of recidivism on mortality were assessed. RESULTS: At 28 days, in arm A, 45 of 269 (16.7%) patients died; in arm B, 38 of 266 (14.3%) died; in arm C, 50 of 258 (19.4%) died; and in arm D, 35 of 260 (13.5%) died. For PTX, the odds ratio for 28-day mortality was 1.07 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.40; p = 0.686)] and for prednisolone the odds ratio was 0.72 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.01; p = 0.056). In the logistic regression analysis, accounting for indices of disease severity and prognosis, the odds ratio for 28-day mortality in the prednisolone-treated group was 0.61 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.91; p = 0.015). At 90 days and 1 year there were no significant differences in mortality rates between the treatment groups. Serious infections occurred in 13% of patients treated with prednisolone compared with 7% of controls (p = 0.002). At the 90-day follow-up, 45% of patients reported being completely abstinent, 9% reported drinking within safety limits and 33% had an unknown level of alcohol consumption. At 1 year, 37% of patients reported being completely abstinent, 10% reported drinking within safety limits and 39% had an unknown level of alcohol consumption. Only 22% of patients had attended alcohol rehabilitation treatment at 90 days and 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that prednisolone reduces the risk of mortality at 28 days, but this benefit is not sustained beyond 28 days. PTX had no impact on survival. Future research should focus on interventions to promote abstinence and on treatments that suppress the hepatic inflammation without increasing susceptibility to infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as EudraCT 2009-013897-42 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88782125. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 102. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The NIHR Clinical Research Network provided research nurse support and the Imperial College Biomedical Research Centre also provided funding.